,-ERAL ASSEMBLY 


A IsT D 

/ ITS ACCUSERS 


-THE CHARGES PREFERRED. 

f Old School Presbyterian Church in the 
e States of America has been arraigned 
its General Assembly, at the bar of 
jo istian public upon certain grave char- 
. e ferred against her by certain persons 
/or own communion. These charges per- 
lin to the nature of her mission as a witness- 
earer for the truth among men; and to the 
ature of her jurisdiction as a spiritual court 
1 the Lord’s house. 

Yrst. It is alleged that the General As- 
dy, in its deliverances of the past six 
">n the state of the country, has erred; 
has violated its constitution in that 
'’oh says, u Synods and Councils are 
-othing but that which is ecclesias- 
and in that it has undertaken to 
ecclesiastical body is competent 
it: to decide what civil government 
owes allegiance to. 

It is also alleged that the Gener- 
dy, in some of the deliverances 
ded to, h£s erred on the subject of 
<n that it has taught doctrines wide- 
"’omtlie teachings of the.Presby- 
n Amer’ \ all former times! 

as pro*™ lgated 
coun¬ 


cations the Assembly has violated the plain 
teachings of God’s word, as well as of its own 
written standards; and has departed from the 
accepted utterances of the church in past 
times. These are the charges. To show that 
they are correctly stated—not, at least, over¬ 
stated—we here quote from the Declaration 
and Testimony. This paper was adopted by 
a majority of the Louisville Presbytery, and 
is signed by more than a hundred other min¬ 
isters and elders; and although its violent 
and bitter spirit and schismatical tendency 
are condemned by its apologists and friends, 
yet they, with one accord we believe, claim 
that its principles are true and sound. 

We quote first its charges as to civil affairs: 

The occasion upon which we address you 
is one of no ordinary interest to the Church of 
our Lord Jesus. For several years past that 
Church in this country has been departing 
farther and farther from both the spirit and the 
plain letter of her commission to “preach the 
Gospel to every creature,” and her charter as 
a “Kingdom not of this world.’ The Presby¬ 
terian branch of the Church—that which we 
stand immediately connected with—for which 
our fathers labored, and suffered and prayed; 
and whose doctrine and order we have loved 
above all things else on earth, sadly disap¬ 
pointing our most sanguine hopes, and recrea^' 
to her principles and ancient testimor 1 
essayed to take the lead in thi p 
parture from the faith a^'* 




2 


, irotn the old 
^ug and entreaty ad- 
. „uose who have still remain- 

d faithf \ until we have reason to fear it will 
oe in vain to attempt to bring her back again 
"o the way of truth from which she has depart¬ 
ed. From year to year, as the General Assem¬ 
bly has come together, we have cherished still 
the hope*,that it would reconsider those acts 
which have been the occasion of distrust and 
alarm, and recalling the Church to the true 
spiritual and divine nature of her calling and 
work, would restore the ancient landmarks, 
and thus reassure the hearts of those who have 
trembled for the safety of the Ark of God. 

In the name, therefore, of the living God, 
the Holy one of Israel, we do solemnly testi¬ 
fy— 

I. Against the Assumption on the part of the 
Courts of the Church of the right to decide ques¬ 
tions of State Policy. This right has been as¬ 
sumed by all the Courts of the Church. But we 
shall here only speak particularly of what has 
been done by our Court of highest judicature. 
That the General Assembly has claimed and 
exercised this right of jurisdiction over ques¬ 
tions of State Policy for the past five years, 
and that to the fullest extent, certainly no one 
at all acquainted with the acts of that body 
can deny. We cite in proof only the so-called 
“Spring Resolutions” of’61; the papers on 
the state of the country in ’62 and ’63; the Act 
on the subject of slavery in ’64 ; and the ordi¬ 
nances on “Loyalty” and “the Southern Church¬ 
es” in ’65. 

III. We testify against the sanction given by 
the Church to the perversion of the teachings 


important decla^^ 

expressions of Op;,, • 

inate emancipation oj 

would be unjust and inj 

slave. And then it lj 

the act of 1845 and trej 

precisely the one c 

the Assembly, which 

by an appeal to the t 

the Church has any r. 

support and sanction 

wit—the Word of God. \ 

basis of suppression and x 

laid down a new doctrine 

of slavery, unknown to the . 

primitive church; a doctrine w 

origin in infidelity and fanatic 

trine which the Presbyterian Chu 

fore uniformly treated as a dang 

and which the Assembly of 1845 s». 

dared they could not sanction u wity 

dieting some of the plainest declaraiu. 

Word of God," and “charging the Ap^ 
Christ with conniving at sin, introducing 
the Church such sinners, and thus bring 
upon them the curse of the Almighty.” 1 
further, that Assembly declared that sho 
they affirm the doctrine which the Assembl} 
’64 did affirm, it would be “ to dissolve itsf 
and “abandon the organization under whicl 
the Divine blessing, it has so long prospd 
Nor has the Assembly been content with m 
affirming these new doctrines upon slaver; 
emancipation, but has required a cordial 
and approbation of them, as a conditi 
membership to the Church and of the ex 


of their official functions to the minist 
of Christ and his Apostles upon the subject of (Acts of the Assembly of 1865 passim.) \ 
the duty of Christians, as citizens, to “ render un- The plainest teachings of the Holy Scrlp- 
to Caesar the things that[are Caesar' s,” and to “ be tures respecting the relation and duties ofmas- 
subject unto the higher powers." These and sim- ters and servants, (despotai kai douloi,) have 
ilar scriptures are cited to sustain the claim of been pronounced cruel and unjust; to believe 
the Assembly and other Church Courts|to decide and practice in accordance therewith branded 
upon political questions; to prove that the alle- as an “unwillingness of the human hear£- 
giance of a Christian, as such, is due to a par- see and accept the truth against the prejud 
ticular government. of hn.hit. and interest!” n.nH an institution r' 


We deny that these scriptures, or any others, 
when fairly interpreted, give any sanction to 
the doctrines just stated. These doctrines are 
contrary to the teachings of the word of God, 
and are virtually the doctrines of despotism 
and unquestioning, unconditional submission, 
and obedience to the commands of any actual 
raler, no matter what those commands may be. 
This is to make Christianity the tool of tyrants 
and its teachings the bulwark of unlimited ar¬ 
bitrary power. 


of habit and interest;” and an institution: 


has always existed in the Church unco Y 
ed, and which was recognized and bsJ 
by Christ and his Apostles, is pron/ 
“evil and guilt," condemned as “SIN” <j 
ed to be the “root of rebellion, war/ 
shed, and the long list of horrors 
in their train.” 


As to Slavery: 

IV. We testify against the action of the As¬ 
sembly on the subject of slavery and emancipation 
in 1864, and as confirmed in ’65. In that the 
action of the Assembly has laid itself justly 
to the charge of disingenuousness, in 
"ot quote fairly from former ut- 
'’ne subject^ Ti "'"‘its alto- 


• uni 


Reasons for this Testimony: 

Against each and all of these err 
trine and practice we testify : 

I Because they are contrary to t- 
God and subversive of its inspira tion <4 
authority as the only infallible rul 
and practice. 

II. Because they are contrary to,- 
of the Presbyterian/^ 1111,0 ! 1 slsjt 
Confession, Catecj/ an d 

“Synods and jf 
elude / - w 


ar<~ ‘ 





which concern the Commonwealth.” [Conf. 
F. c xxxi, sec. 1, 4 ] 

III. Because they tend to obliterate all the 
lines of separation between the civil and ecclesiasti¬ 
cal powers, to confound their jurisdictions, to 
identify them with each other, and so to des¬ 
troy the freedom of both. If the Church may 
adjudicate upon “civil affairs whi h do con¬ 
cern the Commonwealth,” on the pretense that 
these affairs “rise up into the region of mor¬ 
als,” and the State may assume to regulate the 
worship and teaching and discipline of the 
Church, and control her courts, under the pre¬ 
tense of “ maintaining the authority of the 
Government and preserving the life of the na¬ 
tion : then there is a practical union of Church 
and State, and an end of civil and religious 
liberty,and the establishment of a meretricious 
Politico-Ecclesiastical Despotism. 

Such are the charges against the General 
Assembly; and, through it, against the great 
body of the Presbyterian Church. They have 
been[amplified and re-iterated throughout the 
land in sermons, addresses, newspaper arti¬ 
cles, and pamphlets, almost without number; 
and they are, without doubt, by some honestly 
believed to be true. It is the object of this 
tract to show that they are not true; that the 
Assembly and the whole Church have been 
strangely misunderstood—her late acts wan¬ 
tonly misrepresented, and her former deliver¬ 
ances habitually ignored; that neither in her 
acts relative to civil affairs , or to slavery , has 
the Presbyterian Church of this generation 
departed from her ancient testimonies. The 
method of proof we have adopted is simple, 
and to every candid inquirer must be satis¬ 
factory : it is to let the Church speak for her¬ 
self by quoting from official records her clear 
and unequivocal utterances upon these topics. 
By thus bringing the charges tabled against 
the church—whether by her enemies or her 
erring children—face to face with her own 
recorded testimonies, every reader can judge 
for himself whether the preof be valid and 
conclusive; whether the church is guilty of 
apostasy, or whether her accuses are guilty 
of bearing false witness against her. 


I. ON CIVIL AFFAIRS. 

It will be remembered by the student of 
history that about the middle of the eighteenth 
century a fierce conflict of arms arose between 
Great Britain and France for the mastery of 
American territory. The Canadian settle¬ 


ments were peopled mostly by French colo¬ 
nists, and were under French dominion. The 
colonies lying further South, along tile Atlan¬ 
tic coast, were settled chiefly by emigrants 
from Great Britain, with their descendants, 
and were under British rule. In the conflict 
known in the colonies as “ the Old French 
War,” Great Britain, aided by her American 
Colonies, was the victor. France lost forev¬ 
er all her possessions on this continent. In 
that contest, the American Presbyterian 
Church boldly avowed its sympathy with, and 
allegiance to the British government. In 
proof, we cite the following Pastoral Letter 
to the Churches under the care of the Synod. 
(The Synod was at that time the chief judi¬ 
catory of the Church.) 

Title 2.— documents on civil affairs. 

§ 45. Pastoral Letter upon occasion of the 
“ Old French War .” 

1756, p. 276. The Synod under a sense of 
the present distressed and calamitous state of 
the country, do agree that they will recom¬ 
mend to all their congregations to unite in ob¬ 
serving the last Thursday of October instant, 
as a day of public humiliation, fasting and 
prayer. 

The Synod propose further to recommend to 
their congregations to spend part of the last 
Thursday of every month in extraordinary 
prayer, while the present mournful state of 
our public affairs continues. 

And they do further most'earnestly recom¬ 
mend it to all their members, present and ab¬ 
sent, to exert themselves in an extraordinary 
manner, in their several spheres of influence, 
for a general and thorough reformation of 
those crying abominations which seem most 
evidently to have kindled the anger of Heaven 
against this land. 

And that they would, in their public perfor¬ 
mances, frequently explain, and warmly press 
on their hearers the necessity of such a refor¬ 
mation in this day. 

The Synod taking into serious considera¬ 
tion the dangerous situation of the public at 
this juncture, by means of a potent, prevailing, 
and cruel enemy; the divided state of these 
colonies; the abounding of profanity, luxu¬ 
ry, infidelity, error, and ignorance; the evi¬ 
dent suspension of spiritual influences from 
the Church, which is followed with an evident 
insensibility under the judgments as well as 
ordinances of God ; together with other awful 
aspects of Divine Providence; cannot but view 
them as plain demonstrations of his displea¬ 
sure. We have been warned and chastised, 
first more gently, then more terribly; but not 
returning to him that smites us, his anger 
is not turned away, but his hand is stretched 



out still. Judgment yet proceeds, the pros¬ 
pect becomes darker and darker, and all things 
respecting us, are loudly alarming. When 
God judges he will overcome; none have ever 
hardened themselves against him and prosper¬ 
ed. Nothing but impiety rouses his vengeance, 
and nothing but repentance towards him, and 
faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, can turn 
it away. We have not so much as the least 
reason to expect deliverance and safety in a 
way of impenitent sinning; for we are assur¬ 
ed, if we walk contrary to our God, he will 
walk contrary to us, and will punish us yet 
seven times more for our iniquity. And as 
we judge that extraordinary distresses are 
calls to extraordinary humiliation and acts 
of devotion, so we look on ourselves bound 
not only as members of the community but 
by the duty of our office, as those who are 
entrusted with the declaration of God’s reveal¬ 
ed will, to warn all who will attend unto us, 
and earnestly exhort them to prostrate them¬ 
selves before his offended majesty, in the hum¬ 
blest manner; to deprecate his righteous dis¬ 
pleasure; implore his mercy for themselves, 
their children, country, and nation, their and 
our rightful and gracious soverign King George 
the Second, his royal family, all officers civil 
and military, and the whole Chureh of God; 
and solemnly endeavor sincere and thorough 
reformation. For this purpose the Synod agree 
to recommend the last Thursday of this inst. 
to be observed as a day of public fasting and 
prayer, in all the congregations under our care. 
We also recommend to all the members of our 
body, that they exert themselves in promoting 
a reformation from those evils which have evi¬ 
dently kindled the anger of Heaven against 
this land; and that they would frequently 
urge the necessity of such a reformation in 
this day. 

Signed in the name of the Synod. 

Richard Treat, Synod Clerk. 

In this letter the Synod did not hesitate to 
“ take into serious consideration the danger, 
ous situation of the public,” at a time when 
the boldness of the French arms and the in¬ 
competency of the English generals had welj 
nigh ruined the cause of Great Britain in 
this country. Nor *did they hesitate to stig¬ 
matise the French as a “potent and cruel en 
emy; nor to exhort the people to pray for the 
government and all its officers; nor to ac¬ 
knowledge King George the Second as our 
rightful Sovereign—and this in a time of war 
when two “rival Caesars” laid claim to the 
sovereignty of these colonies! 

Soon after this began the troubles betv een 
the mother country and her American colo¬ 
onies, which led to the war of the Revolution 


and ended in American Independence. While 
these troubles were pending, the Presbyterian 
Church, through the Synod, openly espoused 
the cause of liberty. They characterized the 
oppressive enactments of Great Britain in se¬ 
vere terms; they however insisted on alleg¬ 
iance to the British throne until all hope of 
reconciliation was gone; they then declared 
for their country against the king and his 
parliament. 

The following is the “Pastoral Letter on 
the repeal of the Stamp Act:” 

§ 46. Postoral Letter upon the repeal of the 
Stamp Act. 

1766, p. 362. Dearly Beloved ,—We think it 
our indispensable duty, not only in our par¬ 
ticular charges, but in this united and more 
public c pacity, to direct you to some suitable 
reflections upon the late remarkable and mer¬ 
ciful steps of Divine Providence, and to incul¬ 
cate a becoming improvement of an event, the 
most interesting and important to the people 
of this continent. For not only in the word of 
God should we attend to his divine will, but 
also mark his hand in that providence by 
which he directs the course of human affairs 
with invariable wisdom and paternal good¬ 
ness. 

The faithless French, and their savage 
allies, were lately the rod of divine displea¬ 
sure for our many provocations. Under the 
calamities of war, and the wasting ravages of 
Indian cruelty, we were repeatedly brought to 
approach the throne of grace, with solemn 
fasting and prayer; and thereby openly pro¬ 
fessed our resolution to forsake the ways of 
sin and turn unto the Lord. But alas l we 
rendered not to God according to the multitude 
of his tender mercies, for no sooner was the 
rod removed and the blessings of peace restor¬ 
ed, but we became more vain and dissolute 
than before. 

The Almighty thus provoked, permitted 
counsels of the most pernicious tendency, both 
to Great Britain and her colonies. The impo¬ 
sition of unusual taxes, a severe restriction of 
of our trade, and an almost total stagnation 
of business, threatened us with inevitable 
ruin. A long suspense, of the inestimable 
privilege of English liberty, filled every breast 
with the most painful anxiety. A gloomy 
cloud thickened over our heads, ready to burst 
upon us in a desolating storm. Had our gra¬ 
cious Sovereign, the present Ministry, and 
the British Parliament been less wise, just and 
good; had they instead of yielding to a spirit 
of moderation, unhappily recurred to force, we 
shudder at the very thoughts of the consequen¬ 
ces. We cannot look down the precipice on 
the brink of which we stood, without horror. 
We were not without reason apprehensive that 
the tumultuous outrages, which in some places 


attended a determined opposition to the dis¬ 
relished statute, might provoke the resentment 
of the British legislature. 

When we reflect on the public offences of our 
land against Heaven; when we think of the 
open disregard and violation of the holy Sab¬ 
bath; the neglect of the ordinances of divine 
worship, the abuse of gospel light and privile¬ 
ges, the profane swearing and cursing, intem¬ 
perance and luxury, the various scenes of un¬ 
cleanness and lasciviousness, the pride and 
vanity, and every other evil so shamefully pre¬ 
valent, what less could we expect than that 
an offended G«d would have made the gath¬ 
ering tempest to break upon us, and plunge us 
and our mother country in all the rueful ca¬ 
lamities of a civil war? But how astonishing 
is the long suffering patience of Jehovah ! He 
has inclined the hearts of many powerful 
friends to espouse our cause. He has given us 
to experience the paternal tenderness of the 
best of kings, and the moderation of the Bri¬ 
tish Parliament. Our gracious God is our de¬ 
liverer. He is making a further trial of us. 
May his unmerited goodnessflead us to repent¬ 
ance. 

We therefore call upon you who are the dear 
people of our charge, not only to acknowledge 
with joy and gratitude, the general providence 
of God, but also, thankfully to adore that par¬ 
ticular providence wherein upon special oc¬ 
casions, he directs and controls the course of 
events by his immediate influence, and where¬ 
by he hath on the late interesting occasion, so 
signally appeared for our protection. We call 
upon you constantly to reverence that all-wise 
and omnipotent Director and Disposer of events 
on whom we depend for every mercy we enjoy 
to be thankful to him for every instance of 
prosperity, patient under every affliction, sub¬ 
missive to his wise disposals, and obedient to 
all his holy precepts; to awake to repentance 
to consider your ways, and to turn unto the 
Lord, through his Son Jesus Christ. Let every 
one beware of adding to the common stock of 
guilt and iniquity. We beseech and obtest 
you to be strict in observing the laws and or¬ 
dinances of Jesus Christ, to pay a sacred re¬ 
gard to his Sabbath, to reverence his holy 
name, and adorn the doctrine of God our Sa¬ 
viour by good works. We pray you to seek 
earnestly the saving knowledge of Christ, and 
the iuternal power and spirit of religion. Thus 
may you hope for the continued kindness of a 
gracious Providence, and this is the way to 
express your gratitude to the Father of mercies 
for your late glorious deliverance. But per¬ 
sisting to grieve the Holy Spirit, by a negleet 
of vital religion, and a continuance in sin, you 
will have reason to dread that an holy God 
will punish you yet seven times more for your 
iniquities. 

While we thus call upon you to fear God, you 
will not forget to honour your king, and pay a 
due submission to his august parliament. Let 
this fresh instance of royal clemency increase 
the ardor of your affection tc the person, fam¬ 


ily and government, of our rightful and gra¬ 
cious sovreign. This you will manifest by a 
cheerful and ready odedience to civil authori¬ 
ty. A spirit of liberty is highly laudable when 
under proper regulations, but we hope you will 
carefully distinguish between liberty and li¬ 
centiousness. 

We most earnestly recommend it to you to 
encourage and strengthen the hands of gov¬ 
ernment, to demonstrate on every proper oc¬ 
casion your undissembled love for your mother 
country, and your attachment to her true in¬ 
terest, so inseparably connected with @ur 
own. 

That thus you may become wise and good, 
as well as free and happy, and that while you 
enjoy liberty, civil and religious, you may not 
be the servants of sin and Satan, is the fer¬ 
vent prayer of those who watch for your souls, 
as men who must give an account. 

Signed by order, 

Elihu Spencer, Moderator. 

Presby. Church , at N. Y. May 30 th, 176G. 

This letter was delivered to the churches 
ten years before the Declaration of Indepen¬ 
dence was published. Observe the allusions 
to the “faithless French,’’the “pernicious coun¬ 
sels” of the British Parliament, “unusual 
taxes,” severe “restrictions on trade,” <fce. 
The exhortation to “honor the king,” “encour¬ 
age and strengthen the hands of government,” 
<fcc. But the hope of a peaceful solution of 
the civil troubles was doomed to disappoint¬ 
ment. Nine years later the clouds of an im¬ 
pending storm began to hover over the land. 
In April 1775 the battle of Lexington was 
fought. In May following the Synod met, and 
while in session adopted the following Pastor¬ 
al Letter: 

g 48. Pastoral Letter upon occasion of the Revo¬ 
lutionary War. 

1775, p. 463. Dr. Witherspoon and Dr. Rodg¬ 
ers, Messrs. Caldwell, Halsey, Smith, Kerr, 
and Ogden, are appointed a committee to bring 
in to-morrow in the afternoon, a draught of a 
pastoral letter. 

p. 466. The committee brought in a draught 
of a pastoral letter, which, after a few altera¬ 
tions, was approved, ordered to be printed, and 
is as follows: 

Very Dear Brethren —The Synod of New York 
and Philadelphia being met at a time when 
public affairs wear so threatening an aspect, 
and when (unless God in his sovereign pro¬ 
vidence speedily prevent it) all the horro>s of 
a civil war throughout this great Continent 
are to be apprehended, were of opinion, 
that they could not discharge their duty to the 
numerous Congregations under their care, 
without addressing them at this important 


crisis. As the firm belief, and habitual recol¬ 
lection of the power and presence of the living 
God, ought at all times to posses the minds of 
real Christians, so in seasons of public calam¬ 
ity, when the Lord is known by the judgment 
which he executeth, it would be an ignorance 
or indifference highly criminal not to look up to 
him with reverence, to implore his mercy by 
humble and fervent prayer, and, if possible, 
to prevent his vengeance by unfeigned repen¬ 
tance. 

We therefore, brethren, beseech you in the 
most earnest manner, to look beyond the im¬ 
mediate authors either of your sufferings or 
fears, and to acknowlege the holiness and jus¬ 
tice of the Almighty in the present visitation. 
He is righteous in all his ways, and holy in 
all his works. Affliction springeth, not out of 
the dust. He doth not afflict willingly, nor 
grieve the children of men ; and therefore, it 
becomes every person, family, city, and pro¬ 
vince, to humble themselves before his throne, 
to confess their sins, by which they have pro¬ 
voked his indignation, and entreat him to pour 
out upon all ranks a spirit of repentance and 
of prayer. Fly also for forgiveness to the 
atoning blood of the great Redeemer the 
blood that speaketh better things than that 
of Abel. Remember and confess not only 
your sins in general, but those prevalent 
national offences, which may be justly con¬ 
sidered as the procuring causes of public judg¬ 
ments; particularly profaneuess and contempt 
of God, his name, Sabbaths, and sanctuary ; 
pride, luxury, uncleanness, and neglect 
of family religion and government, with the 
deplorable ignorance and security which cer¬ 
tainly ought to be imputed to this as their 
principal cause. All these are, among us, 
highly aggravated by the inestimable pi'ivile- 
ges which we have hitherto enjoyed without 
interruption since the first settlement of this 
country. If, in the present day of distress, 
we expect that God will hear our supplications, 
and intei'pose for our protection or deliverance 
let us remember, what he himself requires of 
us is, that our prayers should be attended with 
a sincere purpose, and thorough endeavour af¬ 
ter personal and family reformation. “If 
thou prepare thine heart, and stretch out thine 
hand towards him, if iniquity be in thine hand 
put it far away, and let not wickedness dwell 
in thy tabernacles.”—Job xi. 13, 14. 

The Synod cannot help thinking that this 
is a proper time for pressing all of every rank, 
seriously to consider the things that belong to 
their eternal peace. Hostilities, long feared, 
have now taken place; the sword has been 
drawn in one province, and the whole continent 
with hardly any exception, seem determined 
to defend their rights by force of arms. If, at 
the same time, the British ministry shall con¬ 
tinue to enforce their claims by violence, a 
lasting and bloody contest must be expected. 
Surely, then it becomes those who have taken 
up arms, and profess a willingness to hazard 
their lives in cause of liberty, to be prepared 


for death, which to many must be certain, and 
to every one is a possible or probable event. 

We have long seen with concern, the circum¬ 
stances which occasioned, and the gradual in¬ 
crease of, this unhappy difference. As Minis¬ 
ters of the gospel of peace, we have ardently 
wished that it could, and often hoped that it 
would, have been more early accommodated. 
It is well known to you, (otherwise it would be 
imprudent indeed thus publicly to profess,) 
that we have notbeen instrumental in inflaming 
the minds of the people, or urging them to acts 
of violence and disorder. Perha; s no instance 
can be given on so interesting a subject, in 
which political sentiments have been so long 
and so fully kept from the pulpit, and even 
malice itself has not charged'us with laboring 
from the press: but things are now come to 
such a state, that we do not wish to conceal 
our opinions as men and citizens, so the rela¬ 
tion we stand in to you seemed to make the 
present improvement of it to your spiritual 
benefit, an indispensable duty. 

Suffer us then to lay hold of your present 
temper of mind, and to exhort, especially, the 
young and vigorous, by assuring them that 
there is no soldier so undaunted as the pious 
man, no array so formidable as those who are 
superior to the fear of death. There is noth¬ 
ing more awful to think of, than that those 
whose trade is war, should be despisers of the 
name of the Lord of hosts, and that they should 
expose themselves to the imminent danger of 
being immediately sent from cursing and cru¬ 
elty on the earth, to the blaspheming rage and 
despairing horror of the infernal pit. Let, 
therefore, every one, who from generosity of 
spirit, or benevolence of heart, offers himself 
as a champion in his country’s cause, be per¬ 
suaded to reverence the name, and walk in the 
tear of the Prince of the kings of the earth, 
and then he may, with the most unshaken firm¬ 
ness, expect the issue either in victory or 
death. 

Let it not be forgotten, that though for the 
wise ends of his providence it may please God, 
for a season, to suffer his people to lie under 
unmerited oppression, yet in general, we may 
expect, that those who fear and gerve him in 
sincerity and truth, will be favored with his 
countenance and strength. It is the character 
and the privilege of the children of Ged, that 
they call upon him in the day of trouble, and 
he, who keepeth covenant and truth for ever, 
has said, that his ears are always open to their 
cry. VVe need not mention to you in how many 
instances the event in battles, and success in 
war, have turned upon circumstances which 
were inconsiderable in themselves, as well as 
out of the power of human prudence to foresee 
or direct, because we suppose you firmly be¬ 
lieve that after all the counsels of men, and 
the most probable and promising means, the 
Lord will do that which seemeth him good; 
nor hath his promise ever failed of its full ac¬ 
complishment ; the Lord is with you while ye 
be with him, and if ye seek him he will be 


7 


found of you; but if ye forsake him he will 
forsake you. 2 Ckron xv. 2. 

After this exhortation, which we thought 
ourselves called upon to give you at this time, 
on your great interest, the one thing needful, 
we shall take the liberty to offer a few advices 
to the societies under our charge, as to their 
public and general conduct; and, 

First. In carrying on this important strug¬ 
gle, let every opportunity be taken to express 
your attachment and respect to our sovereign, 
King George, and to the revolution principles 
by which his august family was seated on the 
British throne. We recommend, indeed, not 
only allegiance to him from duty and princi¬ 
ple, as the first magistrate of the empire, but 
esteem and reverence for the person of the 
prince, who has merited well of his subjects on 
many accounts, and who has probably been mis¬ 
led into the late and present measures by those 
about him; neither have we any doubt that 
they themselves have been in a great degree 
deceived by false information from interested 
persons residing in America. It gives us the 
greatest pleasure to say, from our own certain 
knowledge of all belonging to our communion, 
and from the best means of information of the 
far greatest part of all denominations in the 
country, that Use present opposition to the 
measures of administration does notin the least 
arise from disaffection to the king, or a desire 
of separation from the parent state. We are 
happy of being able with truth to affirm, that 
no part of America would either have approved 
or permitted such insults as have been offered 
to the sovereign in Great Britain. We exhort 
you, therefore, to continue in the same disposi¬ 
tion, and not to suffer oppression, or injury 
itself, easily to provoke you to anything which 
may seem to betray contrary sentiments: let 
it ever appear, that you only desire the pre¬ 
servation and security of those rights which 
belong to you as freemen and Britons, and that 
reconciliation upon these terms is your most 
ardent desire. 

Secondly. Be careful to maintain the union 
which at present subsists through all the colo¬ 
nies ; nothing can be more manifest than that 
the success of every measure depends on its 
being inviolably preserved, and, therefore, we 
hope that you will leave nothing undone which 
can promote that end. In particular, as the 
Continental Congress, now sitting at Philadel¬ 
phia, consists of delegates chosen in the most 
free and unbiassed manner, by the body of the 
people, let them not only be treated with res¬ 
pect, and encouraged in their difficult service 
—not only let your prayers be offered up to 
God for his direction in their proceediugs— 
but adhere firmly to their resolutions ; and let 
it be seen that they are able to bring out the 
whole strength of this vast country to carry 
them into execution. We would also advise 
for the same purpose, that a spirit of candor, 
charity, and mutual esteem, be preserved and 
promoted towards those of different religious 
denominations. Persons of probity and prin¬ 


ciple of every profession, should be united to¬ 
gether as servants of the same Master, and the 
experience of our happy concord hitherto in a 
state of liberty should engage all to unite in 
a support of the common interest; for there is 
no example in history, in which civil liberty 
was destroyed, and the rights of conscience 
preserved entire. 

Thirdly. We do earnestly exhort and be¬ 
seech the societies under our care to be strict 
and vigilant in their private government, and 
to watch over the morals of their several mem¬ 
bers. It is with the utmost pleasure we re¬ 
mind you, that the last Continental Congress 
determined to discourage luxury in living, 
public diversions, and gaming of all kinds, 
which have so fatal an influence on the morals 
of the people. If it is undeniable that universal 
profligacy makes a nation ripe for Divine judg¬ 
ments, and is the natural means of bringing 
them to ruin, reformation of manners is of the 
utmost necessity in our present distress. At 
the same time, as it has been observed by emi¬ 
nent writers,that the censorial power,which had 
for its object the manners of the public in the 
nDcient free States, was absolutely necessary 
to their continuance, we cannot help being of 
opinion that the only thing whieh we have 
now to supply the plaee of this is the religious 
discipline of the several sects with respect to 
their own members ; so that the denomination 
or profession which shall take the most effectual 
care of the instruction of its members, and 
maintain its discipline in the fullest vigor, 
will do the most essential service to the whole 
body. For the very same reason the greatest 
service which magistrates, or persons iu au¬ 
thority can do, with respect to the religion or 
morals of the people, is to defend and secure 
the rights of conscience in the most equal and 
impartial manner. 

Fourthly. We cannot but recommend, and 
urge in the warmest manner, a regard to order 
and the public peace; and sis in many places 
during the confusions that prevail, legal pro¬ 
ceedings have become difficult, it is hoped that 
all persons will conscientiously pay their just 
debts, and to the utmost of their power serve 
one another, so that the evils inseparable from 
a civil war may not be augmented by wanton¬ 
ness and irregularity. 

Fifthly. We think it of importance at this 
time, to recommehd to all of every rank, but 
especially to those who may be called to action 
a spirit of humanity and mercy. Every battle 
of the warrior is with confused uoise, and gar¬ 
ments rolled in blood. It is impossible to ap¬ 
peal to the sword without being exposed to 
many scenes of crulty and slaughter; but it is 
often observed that civil wars are carried on 
with a rancor and spirit of revenge much 
greater than those between independent States. 
The injuries received, or supposed, in civil 
wars, wound more deeply than those of foreign 
enemies; it is therefore the more necessary to 
guard against this abuse, and recommend that 
meekness and gentleness of spirit, which is the 


8 


/ 


noblest attendant on true valor. That man 
will fight most bravely who never fights till it 
is necessary, and who ceases to fight as soon 
as the necessity is over. 

Lastly. We would recommend to all the 
societies under our care, not to content them¬ 
selves with attending devotedly on general 
fasts, but to continue habitually in the exercise 
of prayer, and to have frequent occasional vo¬ 
luntary meetings for solemn intercession with 
God on the important trial. Those who are 
immediately exposed to danger need your sym¬ 
pathy ; and we learn from the Scriptures, that 
fervency and importunity are the very char¬ 
acters of that prayer of the righteous man 
which availeth much. 

We conclude with our most earnest prayer, 
that the God of Heaven may bless you in your 
temporal and spiritual concerns, and that the 
present unnatural dispute may be speedily 
terminated by an equitable and lasting settle¬ 
ment on constitutional principles. 

Signed in the name, presence, and by ap¬ 
pointment of the Synod. 

Benjamin Hait, Moderator , 
New York. May 22c?, 1775. 

N. B.—The Stated Clerk is to insert the pas¬ 
toral letter from a printed copy. The Synod 
agree that five hundred copies of said pastoral 
letter be printed; and order the Synodical 
treasurer to pay the expenses of printing, 
which is to be by the Synod refunded at their 
next meeting. 

Mr. Halsey dissents from that paragraph of 
said letter which contains the declarations of 
allegiance. 

We ask the reader to study this important 
paper with care. The following points are 
clearly brought out in it- 

1. The justness of the Revolution principles 
of 1688: by which the Stuarts were driven 
from the British throne, and the crown trans¬ 
ferred to the Hanover family. 

2. The injustice of purely civil enactments; 
as for example, the Stamp Act. 

3. The question as to what civil government 
its people owed allegiance. 

4. The duty of drawing the sword in sup¬ 
port of the Government in time of war. 

Can any thing be found in the acts of the 
Assembly from 1861 to 1866^quoted further 
on—more obnoxious to the charges of the 
Declaration and Testimony than this Pastor¬ 
al Letter in the time of the Revolution? Are 
not those who are raising an outcry against 
the church really accusing our Old Presbyte¬ 
rian fathers of apostacy? 

It has also been an occasion of much sneer- 
mg-and scoffing that the General Assembly 
appointed days of fasting and prayer during 
the lhte civil war; and that it made its ap¬ 


pointed fasts to conform to the time set by the 
chief magistrate of the nation. This has been 
severely censured — rather denounced. It 
will be a sufficient answer to this charge to 
insert the action of the Old Synod appointing 
a day of prayer for Congress. 

§ 47. Days of fasting and prayer for Congress. 

1775, p. 464. The Synod, considering the 
present alarming state of public affairs, do 
unanimously judgp it their duty to call all the 
Congregations under their care to solemn fast¬ 
ing, humiliation, and prayer, and for this pur¬ 
pose appoint the last Thursday of June next to 
be carefully and religiously observed. But as 
the Continental Congress are now sitting, who 
may probably appoint a fast for the same pur¬ 
pose the Synod, from respect to that august 
body, and for the greater harmony with all 
other denominations, and for the greater pub¬ 
lic order, if the Congress shall appoint a day 
not above four weeks distant from the said 
last Thursday of June, order that the Congre¬ 
gations belonging to this Synod do keep the 
day appointed by the Congress, in obedience 
to this resolution ; and if they appoint a day 
more distant, the Synod order both to be ob¬ 
served by all our communion. The Syn )d al¬ 
so earnestly recommend it to all the Congre¬ 
gations under their care to spend the afternoon 
of the last Thursday in every month in public 
solemn prayer to God, during the continuance 
of our present troubles. 

[Until the end of the war these orders were 
annually renewed.— Minutes, 1777, p. 478; 17- 
78, p. 481; 1779, p. 483; 1780, p. 488.] 

§ 44. Days of Worship appointed by the civil 
authorities. 

1849, p. 265. And overture from a venera¬ 
ble and distinguished father in the Church, 
proposing, that in view of the great desecra¬ 
tion of the Sabbath by our national legislature, 
and men high in political place and favor; and 
in view of destructive frosts and terrible con¬ 
flagrations, and the peculiar judgments of God 
upon our western waters, in the late destruc¬ 
tion of steamers, and in the dreadful preva¬ 
lence of the Asiatic cholera, these frowning 
indications by which he would vindicate his 
holy day; as well as in view of the abounding 
murders and other aggravated crimes which 
provoke his righteous indignation ; and also, 
in view of the suspension of divine influences, 
this General Assembly appoint a day of fast¬ 
ing, humiliation, and prayer. 

The committee recommended that the Assem¬ 
bly do appoint the last Thursday of June next 
for this purpose ; unless in the meantime the 
President of these United States should recom¬ 
mend a different day for national fasting; in 
which case, our Churches are desired to con¬ 
form, by changing the time we specify, to the 
day mentioned in the civil proclamation. 

In this connection, the Committee further 




9 


recommend that this Assembly sanction and 
approve the practice of particular Churches 
observing with appropriate worship, days of 
thanksgiving, recommended in proclamation 
by the Governors of Commonwealths in which 
they are located. The recommendations were 
adopted. 

We think it not unbecoming to insert in 
this place the Assembly’s address to General 
Washington, in 1789. The Synod had now 
grown to such dimensions that it had formed 
out of its own bosom four Synods, and con¬ 
stituted itself the General Assembly of the 
whole Church. 

£ 60. Address to Washington on his election to 
the Presidency. 

1789, p. 6. Resolved unanimously , that an ad¬ 
dress be presented from the General Assembly 
of the Presbyterian Church to the President of 
the United States; and that Drs. Witherspoon, 
Alison, and S. S. Smith, be a committee to 
draught said address. 

Ibid. p. 11. To the President of the United 
States : 

Sir. —The General Assembly of the Presby¬ 
terian Church in the United States of America, 
embrace the earliest opportunity in their pow¬ 
er, to testify the lively and unfeigned pleasure 
which they, with the rest of their fellow-citi¬ 
zens, feel, on your appointment to the first 
office in the nation. 

We adore Almighty God, the Author of every 
perfect gift, who hath endued you with such 
a rare and happy assemblage of talents, as 
hath rendered you equally necessary to your 
country in war and in peace. Your militai'y 
achievemements insured safety and glory to 
America, in the late arduous conflict for free¬ 
dom; while your disinterested conduct, and 
uniformly just discernment of the public in¬ 
terest, gained you the entire confidence of the 
people: An 1 in the present interesting period 
of public affairs, the influence of your personal 
character moderates the divisions of political 
parties and promises a permanent establish¬ 
ment of the civil government. 

From a retirement more glorious than 
thrones and sceptres, you have been called to 
your present elevated station, by the voice of 
a great and a free people; and with an una¬ 
nimity of suffrage that has few, if any exam¬ 
ples, in history. A man more ambitious of 
fame, or less devoted to his country, would 
have refused an office in which his honors 
coaid not be augmented, and where they might 
possibly be subject to a reverse. We are hap¬ 
py that God has inclined your heart to give 
yourself once more to the public. And we de¬ 
rive a favorable presage of the event, from 
the zeal of all classes of the people, and their 
confidence in your virtues ; as well as from the 
knowledge and dignity with which the federal 
councils are filled. But we derive a presage, 
eveu more flattering, from the piety of your 


character. Public virtue is the most certain 
means of public felicity ; and religion is the 
surest basis of virtue. We therefore esteem 
it a peculiar happiness to behold in our chief 
magistrate, a steady, uniform avowed friend of 
the Christian religion; who has commenced 
his administration in rational and exalted sen¬ 
timents of piety; and who, in his private con¬ 
duct, adorns the doctrines of the gospel of 
Christ; and on the most public and solemn oc¬ 
casions, devoutly acknowledges the govern¬ 
ment of Divine Providence. 

The example of distinguished characters will 
ever possess a powerful and extensive influence 
on the public mind; and when we see in such a 
conspicuous station, the amiable example of 
piety to God, of benevolence to men, and of a 
pure and virtuous patriotism, we naturally 
hope that it will diffuse its influence; and that 
eventually, the most happy consequence* will 
result from it. To the force of imitation, we 
will endeavor to add the wholesome instruc¬ 
tions of religion. We can consider ourselves 
as doing an acceptable service to God, in our 
profession, when we contribute to render men 
sober, honest and industrious citizens, and the 
obedient subjects of a lawful government.. In 
these pious labors, we hope to imitate the most 
worthy of our brethren of other Christian 
denominations, and to be imitated by them: 
assured that if we can, by mutual and 
generous emulation, promote truth and virtue, 
we shall render a great and important service 
to the republic; shall receive encouragement 
from every wise and good citizen ; and, above 
all, meet the approbation of our Divine Mas¬ 
ter. 

We pray Almighty God, to have you always 
in his holy keeping. May he prolong your 
valuable life, an ornament and a blessing to 
your country, and at last bestow on you the 
glorious reward of a faithful servant. 

Signed by order of the General Assembly, 

John Rodgers, Moderator. 

Philadelphia May 26, 1789. 

Upon a careful reading of these papers, no 
man in his senses can deny that they contain 
as much, and as purely political matter as 
any or all the deliverances of our Assembly 
from 1861 to 1866. But it is alleged that 
these acts of our highest Church Court are 
contrary to our standards, which say, “Syn¬ 
ods and Councils are not to intermeddle with 
civil affairs which concern the Common¬ 
wealth.” Now it is evident that our Church, 
even as late as 1830, did not regard these 
“ Pastoral Letters,” &e. as any way inconsist¬ 
ent with our standards, including the part 
quoted above; for that year an overture was 
sent ujtto the Assembly in regard to “ certain 
slanderous reports ” that the Presbyterian 


10 


Church was conniving at a union of church 
and state. In reply the Assembly quotes these 
very parts of our book, and states that they 
ivere our father’s principles, before and dur¬ 
ing the Revolution , &c. We ask special 
attention to this point. 

§ 39. Principles on the union of the Church 
and State. 

[See Book I. 7, 9, 10, 14, 16.] 

1830, p. 25. The committee to whom was re¬ 
committed the report on the reference from the 
Presbyteries of Madison and Lancaster, repor¬ 
ted, and their report was adopted, and is as 
follows, viz : 

That said Presbyteries invite the attention 
of the General Assembly to certain slanderous 
reports, extensively circulated against the 
Presbyterian and other denominations, involv¬ 
ing the charge of an attempt on the part of 
these denominations to unite Church and state, 
and thus subvert the civil institutions of our 
country; and intimate their desire that this 
Assembly would take order on the subject, and 
by some public act disabuse themselves and 
their constituents of such unfounded and in¬ 
jurious imputations. In the opinion of your 
committee, no public act is necessary on the 
part of this Assembly to refute a charge wholly 
unsupported by testimony and facts; nor any 
exposition of their principles in relation to 
civil magistracy, and the claims of the Church, 
demanded, other than that contained in our 
acknowledged ecclesiastical standards, and 
published to the world. For the better infor¬ 
mation, however, of any who may be in dan¬ 
ger of imposition from unfounded statements, 
the Assembly would refer to the following'ex- 
hibition of their primcples as contained in the 
accredited Constitution of the Church. 

“1. God the supreme Lord and King of all 
the world, hath ordained civil magistrates to 
be, under him, over the people, for his own 
glory and the public good and to this end hath 
armed them with the power of the sword, for 
the defence and encouragement of them that 
are good, and for t the punishment of evil 
doers. 

“2. It is lawful for Christians to accept and 
execute the office of magistrate, when called 
thereunto ; in the managing whereof, as they 
ought especially to maintain piety, justice and 
peace according to the wholesome laws of each 
commonwealth, so for that end, they may law¬ 
fully now, under the New Testament, wage war 
upon just and necessary occasions. 

“3. Civil magistrates may not assume to 
themselves the administration of the word and 
sacraments; or the power of the keys of the 
kingdom of heaven ; or in the least interfere in 
matters of faith. Yet, as nursing fathers, it is 
the duty of civil magistrates to proftet the 
Church of our common Lord, without giving 
the preference to any denomination of Chris¬ 


tians above the rest, in such a manner that all 
ecclesiastical persons shall enjoy the full, free, 
and unquestioned liberty of discharging every 
part of their sacred functions without violence 
or danger. And as Jesns Christ hath appoin¬ 
ted a regular government and discipline in his 
Church, no law of any commonwealth should 
interfere with, let, or hinder, the due exercise 
thereof, among the voluntary members of any 
denomination of Christians, according to their 
own profession and belief. It is the duty of 
civil magistrates to protect the person and 
good name of all their people, in such an effec¬ 
tual 'manner as that no person be suffered, 
either upon pretence of religion or infidelity, 
to offer any indignity, violence, abuse, or in¬ 
jury, to any other person whatsoever; and to 
take order that all religious and ecclesiastical 
assemblies be held without molestation or dis¬ 
turbance. 

“4. It is the duty of the people to pray for 
magistrates, to honor their persons, to pay 
them tribute and other dues, to obey their law¬ 
ful commands, and to be subject to their au¬ 
thority, for conscience sake. Infidelity or dif¬ 
ference in religion, doth not make void the 
magistrate’s just and legal authority, nor free 
the people from their due obedience to him ; 
from which ecclesiastical persons are not ex¬ 
empted ; much less hath the Pope any power 
or jurisdiction over them in their dominions, 
or over any of their people; and least of all 
to deprive them of their dominions or lives, if 
he shall judge them to be heretics, or upon 
any other pretense whatsoever.”—Confession 
of Faith, Ch. xxiii. 

“Synods and councils are to handle or con¬ 
clude nothing, but that which is ecclesiastical; 
and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs 
which concern the commonwealth, unless by 
way of humble petition, in cases extraordina¬ 
ry ; or by way of advice for satisfaction of con¬ 
science, if they be thereunto required by the 
civil magistrate.”— lbtd. Ch. xxxi. Sec. 4. 

“That God alone is Lord of the conscience, 
and hath left it free from the doctrine and 
commandments of men, which are in anything 
contrary to his word, or beside it in matters of 
faith and worship. Therefore they consider the 
rights of private judgment, in all matters that 
respect religion, as universal and unalienable 
They do not even wish to see any religious 
constitution aided by the civil power, further 
than may be necessary for protection and se¬ 
curity, and at the same time, be equal and com¬ 
mon to all others.”—Form of Government, Ch. 
1, Sec. 1. 

(5) Such are the constitutional principles of 
the Presbyterian Church in these United States 
They were our fathers’ principles, before and 
during the revolution, which issued in the con¬ 
summation of our liberty and independence, 
and under the influence of which they prayed, 
and fought, and bled, by the side of the father 
of our country. They have been the principles 
of their descendants ever since. They are our 
principles still, adopted from conviction, to 


f 


11 


whose support we have pledged ourselves un¬ 
der the most solemn sanctions, and by the pre¬ 
servation of which we believe that the common 
interests of evangelical religion and civil liber¬ 
ty will be most effectually sustained. 

In closing this statement, the Assembly 
would affectionately and earnestly exhort the 
members of their communion, that in the ful¬ 
filment of their civil and religious duties, they 
watch against all unhallowed feelings, and 
that they suffer reproach meekly, not render¬ 
ing railing for railing, nor evil for evil, but by 
patient continuance in well-doing, they com¬ 
mend themselves to every man’s conscience 
in the sight of God. 

We now present the successive deliveran¬ 
ces of the Assembly “on the State of the 
Country” in 1861, 62, 63, 64 and 65, in their 
order. Let the reader compare them with 
these early utterances of the Church on civil 
affairs; and let him attempt to point out 
wherein they go beyond the latter in handling 
things secular or political. 

f ACT OF 1861. 

Gratefully acknowledging the distinguished 
bounty and care of Almighty God toward this 
favored land, and also recognizing our obliga¬ 
tions to submit to every ordinance of man for 
the Lord’s sake, this General Assembly adopt 
the following resolutions; Resolved, 1. That 
in view of the present agitated and unhappy 
condition of this country, the first day of July 
next be hereby set apart as a day of prayer 
throughout our bounds; and that on this day 
ministers and people are called on humbly to 
confess and bewail our national sins, to offer 
our thanks to the Father of light for His abun¬ 
dant and undeserved goodness toward us as a 
nation ; to seek His guidance and blessing up¬ 
on our rulers, and their counsels, as well as on 
the Congress of the United States about to as¬ 
semble; and to implore Him, in the name of 
Jesus Christ, the great High Priest of the 
Christain profession, to turn away his anger 
from us, and speedily restore to us the bless¬ 
ings of an honorable peace. 

Resolved, 2. That this General Assembly, in 
the spirit of that Christian patriotism which 
the sacred Scripture enjoins, and which has 
always characterized this Church, do hereby 
acknowledge and declare our obligation to af¬ 
firm and perpetuate, so far as in us lies, the 
integrity of the United States, and to strength¬ 
en, uphold and encourage the Federal Govern¬ 
ment in the exercise of all its functions under 
our Constitution; and to this ^Constitution in 
all its provisions, requirements and objects, we 
profess our unabated loyalty. And to avoid 
all misconceptions, the Assembly declare, that 
by the terms Federal Government, is not meant 
any particular administration, or the peculiar 
opinions of any particular party, but that cen¬ 
tral administration, which being at any time 


appointed and inaugurated according to the 
forms prescribed in the Constitution of the 
United States, is the visible representative of 
our national existence .—Minutes of the General 
Assembly , p. 329. 

ACT OF 1862. 

The General Assembly of the Presbyterian 
Church in the United States of America, now 
in session at Columbus, in the State of Ohio: 

Considering the unhappy condition of the 
country in the midst of a bloody civil war, and 
of the Church agitated everywhere, divided in 
sentiment in many places, and openly assailed 
by schism in a large section of it; considering 
also, the duty which this chief tribunal, met 
in the name and by the authority of the glori¬ 
fied Saviour of sinners, who is also the sover¬ 
eign Ruler of all things, owes to him, our Head 
and Lord, and to his flock committed to our 
charge, and to the people whom we are com¬ 
missioned to evangelize, and to the civil au¬ 
thorities who exist by his appointment; do 
hereby, in this deliverance, give utterance to 
our solemn convictions and our deliberate 
judgment, touching the matters herein set 
forth, that they may serve for the guidance of 
all over whom the Lord Christ has given us 
any office of instruction, or any power of Gov¬ 
ernment. 

1. Peace is amongst the very highest tem¬ 
poral blessing of the Church as well as of all 
mankind ; and public order is one of the first 
necessities of the spiritual as well as the civil 
commonwealth. Peace has been wickedly su¬ 
perseded by war, in its worst |form, through¬ 
out. the whole land ; and public order has been 
wickedly superseded by rebellion, anarchy,and 
violence, in the whole Southern portion of the 
Union. 

All this has been brought to pass in a disloyal 
and traitorous attempt to overthrow the Na¬ 
tional Government by military force, and to 
divide the nation, contrary to the wishes of 
the immense majority of the people of the na¬ 
tion, and without satisfactory evidence that 
the majority of the people in whom the local 
sovereignty resided,even in the States which re¬ 
volted, ever authorized any such proceeding, 
or ever approved the fraud and violence by 
which this horrible treason has achieved what¬ 
ever success it has had. This whole treason, re¬ 
bellion, anarchy, fraud, and violence, is utter¬ 
ly contrary to the dictates of natural religion 
and morality, and is plainly condemned by the 
revealed will of God. It is the clear and so¬ 
lemn duty of the National Government to pre¬ 
serve, at whatever cost, the national Union 
and Constitution, to maintain the laws in their 
supremacy, to crush force by force, and to re¬ 
store the reign of public order and peace to 
the entire nation, by whatever lawful means 
that are necessary thjreunto. And it is the 
bounden duty of the people who compose this 
great, nation, each one in his several place and 
degree, to uphold the Federal Government, and 
every State Government, and all persons in 


12 


authority, "whether civil or military, in all 
their lawful and proper acts, unto the end 
herein before set forth. 

2. The Church of Christ has no authority 
from him to make rebellion, or to counsel trea¬ 
son, or to favor anarchy in any case whatever. 
On the contrary, every follower of Christ has 
the personal liberty bestowed on him by Christ, 
to submit, for the sake of Christ, according to 
his own conscientious sense of duty, to what¬ 
ever government., however bad, under which 
his lot may be cast. But, while patient suffer¬ 
ing for Christ’s sake can never be sinful, trea¬ 
son, rebellion, and anarchy may be sinful— 
most generally, perhaps, are sinful; and, pro¬ 
bably, are always and necessarily sinful in 
all free countries, where the power to change 
the government by voting, in the place of force 
which exists as a common right, constitution¬ 
ally secured to the people, who are sovereign. 
If, in any case, treason, rebellion, and anarchy 
can possibly be sinful, they are so in the case 
now desolating large portions of this nation, 
and laying waste great numbers of Christian 
congregations, and fatally obstructing every 
good word and work in those regions. To the 
Christian people scattered throughout those 
unfortunate regions, and who have been left 
of God to have any hand in bringing on these 
terrible calamities, we earnestly address words 
of exhortation and rebuke, as unto brethren 
who have sinned exceedingly, and whom God 
calls to repentance, by fearful judgments. To 
those in like circumstances who are not charge¬ 
able with the sins which have brought such ca¬ 
lamities upon the land,but which have chosen in 
the exerci-e of their Christian liberty, to stand 
in their lot and suffer, we address words of 
affectionate sympathy, praying God to bring 
them off conquerors. To those in like circum¬ 
stances, who have taken their lives in their 
hands, and risked all for their country and for 
conscience’ sake, we say, we love such with 
all our heart, and bless God such witnesses 
were found in the time of thick darkness. We 
fear, and we record it with great grief, that 
the Church of God, and the Christian people, 
to a great extent, and throughout all the re¬ 
volted States, have done many things that 
ought not to have been done, and have left un¬ 
done much that ought to have been done, in 
this time of trial, rebuke, and blasphemy; but 
concerning the wide schism which is reported 
to have occurred in manySouthern Synods,this 
Assembly will take no action at this time. It 
declares, however, its fixed purpose, under all 
possible circumstances, to labor for the exten¬ 
sion and the permanent maintenance of the 
Church under its care, in every part of the 
United States. Schism, so far as it may exist, 
we hope to see healed. If that cannot be, it 
will be disregarded. 

3. We record our gratitude to God for the pre¬ 
vailing unity of sentiment and general inter¬ 
nal peace, which have characterized the Church 
in the States that have not revolted embracing 
a great majority of the ministers, congregations 


.and people under our care. It may still be call* 
ed, with emphasis, a loyal, orthodox and pious 
Church; and all its acts and works indicate 
its right to a title so noble. Let it strive for 
divine grace to maintain that good report. In 
some respects,the interest of the Church of God 
are very differentjfrom those of all civil institu¬ 
tions. Whatever may befall this, or any other 
nation, the Church of Christ must abide on 
earth triumphant even over the gates of hell. 
It is, therefore, of supreme importance that the 
Church should guard itself from internal alie¬ 
nations and divisions, founded upon questions 
and interests that are external as to her, and 
which ought not by their necessary workings 
to cause her fate to depend on the fate of things 
less important and less enduring than herself. 
Disturbers of the Church ought not to be allow¬ 
ed : especially disturbers of the Church in 
States that never revolted, or that have been 
cleared of armed rebels : disturbers who, un¬ 
der many false pretexts, may promote discon¬ 
tent, disloyalty, and general alienation, tend¬ 
ing to the unsettling of ministers, to local 
schisms, and to manifold trouble Let a spirit 
of quietness, of mutual forbearance, and of rea- 
d} 7 obedience to authority, both civil and eccle¬ 
siastical, illustrate the loyal'y, the orthordoxy, 
and the piety of the Church. It is more es*- 
pecially to ministers of the gospel, and amongst 
them, particularly to any whose first impres¬ 
sions had been, on any account, favorable to 
the terrible military revolution which has 
been attempted, and which God’s providence 
lias hitherto so singularly rebuked; that these 
decisive considerations ought to be addressed. 
And in the name and by the authority of the 
Lord Jesus we earnestly exhort all who love 
God or fear his wrath, to turn a deaf ear to all 
counsels and suggestions that tend towards a 
reaction favorable to disloyalty, schism, or dis¬ 
turbance either in the Church or in the coun¬ 
try. There is hardly anything more inexcus¬ 
able connected with the frightful conspiracy 
against which we testify, than the conduct of 
those office-bearers and members of the Church 
who, although citizens of loyal Slates, and sub¬ 
ject to the control of loyal Presbyteries and 
Synods, have been faithless to all authority 
human and divine, to which they owed subjec¬ 
tion. Nor should any to whom this Deliver¬ 
ance may come fail to bear in mind that it is 
not onlv their outward conduct concerning 
which they ought to take heed; but it is 
also, and especially their heart, their temper, 
and their motives, in the sight of God, and to¬ 
wards the tree and beneficent civil government 
which he has blessed us withal, and toward 
the spiritual commonwealth to which they are 
subject in the Lord. In all these respects, we 
must all give account to God in the great day. 
And it is in view of our own dread responsibil¬ 
ity to the Judge of quick aud dead that we 
now make this Deliverance. 



13 


ACT OF 1863. 

Dr. Lotvrie's Paper. 

The Committee to whom was referred the 
resolution which proposed to raise the flag of 
the United States upon the building in which 
the Assembly is now convened, and to report 
in respect to the “State of tlje Country,” res¬ 
pectfully present the following report: 

Your Ccmmittee believe that the design of 
the mover of the original resolution, and of 
the large majority, who are apparently ready 
to vote for its adoption, is simply to call forth 
from the Assembly a significant token of our 
sympathy with this Government, in its earnest 
efforts to suppress a rebellion that now for 
over two years has wickedly stood in armed re¬ 
sistance to lawful and beneficent authority. 
But as there are many among us who are un¬ 
doubtedly patriotic ; who are willing to ex¬ 
press any righteous principle to which this 
Assembly should give utterance, touching the 
subjection and attachment of an American citi¬ 
zen to the uuionandits inst itutions who love the 
the flag ot our country, and rejoice iu its succes¬ 
ses by sea aud by land; and who yet do not es¬ 
teem this particular act a testimonial of loyalty 
entirely becoming to a church court,—and as 
many of these brethren, by the pressing of this 
vote, would be placed in a false position, as if 
they did not love the Union, of which that flag 
is thebeloved symbol, your Committee deem 
themselves authorized,by the subsequent direc¬ 
tion of the Assembly, to propose a different ac¬ 
tion to be adopted by this venerable court. 

It is well known, on the one hand, that the 
General Assembly has ever been reluctaut to 
repeat its testimonies upon important matters 
of public interest; but, having given utterance 
to carefully considered words, is content to 
abide calmly by its recorded deliverances. 
Nothing that this Assembly can say can more 
fully express the wickedness of the rebellion 
that has cost so much blood aud treasure ; can 
declare in plainer terms the guilt before God 
and man, of those who have inaugurated, or 
maintained, or countenanced, for so little 
cause, this fratricidal strife; or can more im¬ 
pressively urge the solemn duty of the Gov¬ 
ernment to the lawful exercise ot its authority, 
and of the people, each in his several place, 
to uphold the civil authorities, to the end that 
law and order may again reign throughout 
this entire nation—than these things have al¬ 
ready been done by previous Assemblies. Nor 
need this body declare its solemn rebukes to¬ 
wards those ministers and members of the 
church of Christ, who have aided in bringing 
on and sustaining these immense calamities ; 
or tender our kind sympathies to those who 
are overtaken by troubles they could not avoid, 
and who mourn and weep in secret places, not 
unseen by the Father’s eye; or reprove all 
wilful disturbers of the public peace; or exhort 
those that are subject to our care, to the care¬ 
ful discharge of every duty tending to uphold 
the free and beneficent government under 


which we are, and this specially for conscience 
sake, and as in the sight of God—more than, 
in regard to all these things, the General As¬ 
sembly has made its solemn deliverances, 
since these troubles began. 

But, on the other hand, it may be well for 
this General Assembly to reaffirm, as it now 
solemnly does, the great principles to which 
utterance has already been given. We do this 
the more readity, because our beloved church 
may thus be understood to take her deliberate 
and well-chosen stand, free from all imputa¬ 
tions of haste or excitement; because we re¬ 
cognize an entire harmony between the du¬ 
ties of the citizen, (especially in a land where 
the people frame their own laws, and choose 
their own rulers,) and the duties of the Chris¬ 
tian to the great Head of the Church; because 
indeed, least of all persons, should Christian 
citizens even seem to stand back from their 
duty, when bad men press forward for mis¬ 
chief; and because a true love for our country, 
in her times of peril, shoul forbid us to with¬ 
hold an expression of our attachment, for the 
insufficient reason that we are not accustomed 
to repeat our utterances. 

And because there are those among us who 
have scruples touching,the propriety of any de¬ 
liverance of a church-court respecting civil 
matters, this Assembly would add, that all 
strifes of party politics should indeed be ban¬ 
ished from our ecclesiastical assemblies, and 
from our pulpitg; that Christian people should 
earnestly guard aginst promoting partizan di¬ 
visions ; and that the difficulty of accurately de¬ 
ciding,in some cases, whatare generaland what 
party principles, should make use areful in our 
judgments; but that our duty is none the less 
imperative to uphold the constituted authorities 
because minor delicate questions may possibly 
be involved. Rather, the sphere of the church 
is wider and more searching, touching matters 
of great public interest, than the sphere of the 
civil magistrate, in this important respect —that 
the civil authorities can take cognizance only 
of overt acts ; while the law of which the 
church of God is the interpreter, searches the 
heart, makes every man subject to the civil 
authority, for conscience’ sake, and declares 
that man truly guilty, who allows himself to 
be alienated, in sympathy and feeling, from 
any lawful duty, or who does not conscien- 
tioua’y prefer the welfare, and especially the 
preservation of the government, to any party 
or partisan ends. Officers may not always 
command a citizen’s confidence; measures may 
by him be deemed unwise; earnest, lawful 
efforts may be made for changes he may think 
desirable ; but no causes now exist to vindicate 
the disloyalty of American citizens towards 
the United States government. 

The General Assembly would not withhold 
from the government of the United States, that 
expression of cordial sympathy which a loyal 
people should offer. We believe that God has 
afforded us ample resources to suppress this 
rebellion, and that, with his blessing, it will 


14 


ere long be accomplished. We would animat* 
those who are discouraged by the continuance 
and fluctuations of these costly strifes, to re¬ 
member and rejoice in the supreme govern¬ 
ment of our God, who often leads through per¬ 
plexity and darkness. We would exhort to 
penitence for all our nationa’l sins, to sobriety 
and humbleness of mind before the Great Ru¬ 
ler of all, and to constant prayerfulness for the 
divine blessing; and we would entreat our 
people to beware of all schemes implying resis¬ 
tance to the lawfully constituted authorities, 
by any other means than are recognized as 
lawful to be openly prosecuted. And as this 
Assembly is ready to declare our unalterable 
attachment and adherence to the Union estab¬ 
lished by our fathers, and our unqualified con¬ 
demnation of the rebellion ; to proclaim to the 
world the United States, one and undivided, 
as our country; the lawfully chosen rulers of 
the land, our rulers; the Government of the 
United States, our civil government; and its 
honored flag, our flag; and to affirm that we 
are bound, in the truest and strictest fidelity, 
to the duties of Christian citizens under a gov¬ 
ernment that has strown its blessings with a 
profuse hand, your Committee recommend that 
as the trustees of of this church, concurring in 
the desire of many members of this Assembly, 
have displayed from this edifice the American 
flag, the symbol of national protection, unity, 
and liberty, the particular action contemplated 
in the original resolution be no further urged 
upon the attention of this body. 

Dr. Humphrey's Paper. 

The General Assembly of 1861 adopted a 
minute on the state of the church and the 
country. The Assembly of 1862 uttered a 
more formal and comprehensive deliverance. 
In the meantime, a certain number, perhaps 
the larger portion of the Presbyteries and 
Synods, have expressed their judgments on 
the same subject. This General Assembly is 
persuaded that the office-bearers>and members 
of this church, within the Presbyteries repre¬ 
sented here, are, in a remarkable degree, uni¬ 
ted in a strict and true allegiance to the Con¬ 
stitution and Government of the United 
States; and that they are, as a body, loyal 
both to the church and the civil government as 
ordinances of God. 

This General Assembly contents itself, on 
that part of the subject, by enjoining upon all 
the people of God, who acknowledge this 
church as their church, to uphold, according 
as God shall give them strength, the authority 
of the Constitution and laws of the land in 
this time of national peril. But this Assem¬ 
bly would most distinctly and solemnly incul¬ 
cate upon all its people the duty of humbly 
confessing before God the great unworthiness, 
and the many sins of the people of this land, 
and of acknowledging the holiness and justice 
of the Almighty in the present visitation. He 
is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all 
his works. We exhort our brethren to seek 


the gift of the Holy Ghost, by prayer and con¬ 
fession and repentance, so that the anger of 
the Lord may be turned away from us, and 
that the spirit of piety may become not less 
predominant and vital in the churches than 
the spirit of an awakened patriotism. 

And this Assembly, connecting the experi¬ 
ence of our present trials with the remem¬ 
brance of those through which the church has 
passed, does now recall and adopt the senti¬ 
ments of our fathers in the Church of Scot¬ 
land, as these are expressed for substance in 
the Solemn League and Cevenant of 1643. 
“And because the people of this land are 
guilty of many sins and provocations against 
God, and his Son.Tesus Christ, as is manifest 
by our present distresses and dangers, the 
fruits thereof, we profess and declare before 
God and the world our unfeigned desire to be 
humbled for our own sins and the sins of the 
people, especially that we have not, as we 
ought, valued the inestimable benefit of the 
gospel, nor labored for the purity and power 
thereof; and that we have not, as we ought, 
endeavored to receive Christ in our hearts, 
nor to walk worthy of Him in our lives, 
which are the cause of other sins and trans¬ 
gressions so much abounding among us; and 
our true and unfeigned purpose, desire, and 
endeavor for ourselves, and all others under 
our charge, both in public and private, in all 
duties we owe to God and man, to amend our 
lives, and each one to go before another in the 
example of a real reformation, that the Lord 
may turn away His wrath and heavy indigna¬ 
tion, and establish the church and the land in 
truth and peace.” 

ACT OP 1865. 

(The act of 1864 was mainly on the subject 
of slavery.) 

Dr. Elliott, Chairman of the Special Com¬ 
mittee on the State of the country, presented 
its report. The report was adopted unanim¬ 
ously, by rising, and is as follows. 

This General Assembly, recognizing the 
special providence of Almighty God, the 
Ruler of nations and Redeemer of men, in all 
the events connected with the terrible civil 
war which for four years ha 8 desolated our 
land, would here record our devout tlianks- 
giving and gratitude to Him by whom “kings 
reign and princes decree justice,” for His di¬ 
vine favor to us as a nation, in filling the 
hearts of the loyal poople of these United 
States with an inextinguishable love for the 
national Union, and an unconquerable reso¬ 
lution to preserve it—in raising up a mighty 
host of valiant men, ready to give their lives 
in defense of our national government; in 
blessing the various departments of that gov¬ 
ernment in their work of organizing, equip- 
ing, and maintaining, throughout the entire 
conflict, our vast army and navy; in provid¬ 
ing leaders of wisdom, courage, and skill, 
suited for every emergency; in calling forth 



sucli unwonted benevolence in promoting the A 
physical comfort and spiritual welfare of our 
soldiers and sailors, and in bringing so many 
of them to a saving knowledge, as we trust, 
of the plan of salvation through a crucified 
Redeemer; in bringing to confusion the coun¬ 
sels and overwhelming the power of our ene¬ 
mies, and in crowning our arms with triumph 
ant success. 

We would also render hearty thanks to Al¬ 
mighty God, that in this crisis of our nation’s 
history, he gave us, in Abraham Lincoln, a 
Chief Magistrate who acknowledged his de¬ 
pendence on Him for wisdom and strength, 
and who eminently illustrated, in his life and 
character the virtues of fidelity to official 
duty, integrity, and uprightness, firmness of 
purpose, patient endurance, courage and 
hope in disaster, moderation in victory, sym¬ 
pathy with the suffering, and kindness to 
foes ;—one who exhibited that wisdom, sagaci¬ 
ty, and mercy in administering the affairs of 
the nation, which secured for him the confi¬ 
dence and esteem of friends, silenced the cal¬ 
umnies of enemies, and constrained from 
malignant opposers and rebels, expressions of 
respect and admiration, and which will cause 
his name and memory to be honored and re¬ 
vered by the pure and good in all time to come. 

While we deeply deplore the loss of such a 
Chief Magistrate, and bow in humble submis¬ 
sion to that mysterious providence which per¬ 
mitted treason, as its culminating act of 
atrocity and wickedness, to terminate his life 
by the hand of an assassin, we would render 
devout thanksgiving to God, that he was pro¬ 
tected from all the machinations of his relent¬ 
less enemies until he was permitted to see the 
power of the rebellion crushed, its strong¬ 
holds repossessed, its conquered armies forced 
to surrender; the national honor, untarnished 
by acts of barbarism or cruelty, vindicated; 
the integrity of the Union preserved;—that 
scheme of emancipation, which he had the 
wisdom to devise, and the courage to execute, 
made effective to the deliverance from bond¬ 
age of four millions of slaves, for whose per 
petual enslavement the rebellion was inaugu¬ 
rated; and peace, upon principles of righte¬ 
ousness and universal freedom, already dawn¬ 
ing upon the land. 

In closing this record, we would invoke the 
Divine blessing upon our present Chief Mag¬ 
istrate, and would ask for him the prayers of 
all Christian people, that he may be endowed 
with the fear of God, and with the spirit of 
wisdom and of a sound mind, and be enabled, 
through wise counsels, and by just and pru¬ 
dent measures, to secure to this nation the 
full enjoyment of that peace which has been 
obtained at the price of so much blood; and 
we commend all our rulers and all the people 
to the gracious favor of Him who, by his re¬ 
cent providences, has given renewed assur¬ 
ance that though “clouds and darkness are 
round about him, righteousness and judgment 
are the habitation of his throne.” 


CTS OF THE ECraEEBK CHURCH RELATING 
TO THE WAlt. 

Southern Presbyterians join in the fierce 
assaults upon our Church for its alleged “apos¬ 
tasy” in thus dealing with civil affairs; with 
what consistency let the reader judge, upon a 
candid comparison of the above deliverances 
of our Assembly from 1861 to 1865 with the 
following extracts from the deliverances of 
Southern Church Courts. 

Confederate General Assembly of 1861. 

The Confederate General Assembly of the 
Presbyterian Church, December, 1861, de¬ 
clared : 

“In the first place we notice the relation of 
our congregations to the great struggle in 
which we are engaged. All the Presbyterial 
narratives, without exception, mention the 
fact that their congregations have evinced the 
most cordial sympathy with the people of the 
Confederate States in their efforts to maintain 
their cherished rights and institutions against 
the despotic power which is attempting to 
crush them. Deeply convinced that this is 
not alone for civil rights, and property, and 
for home, but also for religion, for the church, 
for the gospel, and for existence itself, the 
churches in our connection have freely con¬ 
tributed to its prosecution of their substance, 
and, above all, of their members and the be¬ 
loved youth of their congregations. They 
have parted without a murmur with those who 
constitute the hope of tha church, and have 
bidden them go forth to the support of this 
great and sacred cause with their benedictions 
and with their supplications for their protec¬ 
tion and success. The Assembly desire to 
record with its solemn approval this fact of 
the unanimity of our people in supporting a 
contest to which religion as well as patriotism 
now summons the citizens of this country, 
and to implore for them the blessings of God 
in the course which they are now pursuing.” 

Presbytery of Charleston. 

The Presbytery of Charleston, S. C. f July 
24, 1861, resolved: 

We do most heartily, with the full approval 
of our conscience before our Lord God, unani¬ 
mously approve the action of the States and 
people of the Confederate States of America. 

Synod of South Carolina in 1860. 

December 3.—Report of Committee unani¬ 
mously adopted, closing thus: 

The Synod has no hesitation, therefore, in 
expressing the belief that the people of South 
Carolina are now solemnly called on to imitate 
their Revolutionary forefathers, and stand up 
for their rights. We have an humble and abi¬ 
ding confidence that God, whose truth we rep¬ 
resent in this conflict, will be with us ; and, 
exhorting our churches and people to put their 


16 


trust in God, and go forward in the solemn 
path of duty which his Providence opens be¬ 
fore them, we, elders and members of the Pres¬ 
byterian Church iu South Carolina Synod 
assembled, would give them our benediction, 
and the assurance that we shall fervently and 
unceasingly implore for them the care and 
protection of Almighty God. 

Synod of North Carolina in 1861. 

“The Committee appointed to prepare and 
bring in a minute expressive of the views of 
the Synod in relation to the state of the coun¬ 
try, and of the Church as affected thereby, 
report the following preamble and resolu¬ 
tions: 

“Whereas, The country is involved in a 
bloody internecine war, the desolations of 
which threaten our citizens, and the sacrifices 
of which have affected the Church of our be¬ 
loved State; and whereas, by the tyranny and 
usurpation of the Government at Washington , 
the safeguards of the Constitution have been 
broken down , threatening all that is dear in 
civil liberty, and all that is precious m the inher¬ 
itance received from our fathers ; and, whereas, 
the several Presbyteries composing this Synod 
have, in view of these deeds, as well as in 
view of the extraordinary endorsement of 
them by the General Assembly of the Presby¬ 
terian Church of the United States, requiring 
us and our churches to approve and pray for 
the success of measures so tyrannical and in¬ 
iquitous, have formally and solemnly dis¬ 
solved all connection with said General As¬ 
sembly, declaring, however, their steadfast ad¬ 
herence in all respects to the Confession, Cat¬ 
echisms, Form of Government, Book of Disci¬ 
pline, and Directory of Worship, of the Pres¬ 
byterian Church, and have severally appoint¬ 
ed delegates to meet at Augusta, Georgia, and, 
with other commissioners from the several 
Presbyteries of the South, then and there to 
constitute and form a General Assembly for 
the Confederate States of America; therefore, 
in the fear of God, and under a solemn sense 
of duty, be it resolved by the Synod of North 
Carolina: 

“1. That the Synod intelligently, cordially, 
and solemnly approves of the action of its sev¬ 
eral Presbyteries in the premises. 

“2. That the Synod, set and appointed by 
her Divine Head as a witness for the right 
and for truth, deeply, truly sympathises with 
the State, and with the Confederate States, in 
their present righteous struggle, and cordially 
approves their action in asserting and rnain- 
tuining their sovereignty, and severing the 
ties that bound us and them to the late United 
States of America. 

“3. That the Synod regards the present war 
on our part as a war of defense, commending 
itself to our people’s efforts, prayers and 
hearts, as a hallowed though stern, contest for 
sacred rights , involving homes and altars , liberty 
and religion , and to it we solemnly, prayerfully 


commit our persons and efforts, our energies and 
property, our sons and lives. 

“4. That the Synod recognizes, and here 
with gratitude records the tokens of divine 
favor extended to our struggling, bleeding 
country, leading our hosts in the day of 
battle, shielding them under fearful peril and 
giving them brilliant victories, for all which 
we desire to present fervent and unceasing 
thanksgivings. 

“5. That the Synod, in this momentous crisis 
in our country’s history, urge pastors, elders, 
private Christians and our whole people, to 
the offering of unceasing prayers in behalf of 
the Confederate States in their present noble 
struggle in defense of constitutional liberty, 
beseeching our covenant God and Father to 
lead our armies, to drive back our enemies, 
and early to enable us in his fear and love to 
achieve a nation’s greatness.”— Minutes of the 
Synod of North Carolina , pp. 18 and 19. 

We have now presented entire the various 
deliverances of our Church on civil affairs, 
made during seasons of great civil commotion 
and strife. No sane man can read them with 
care, and say that the Assembly has during 
our late troubles departed from the examples 
and practice of the Church in former times. 
We might properly close the record here up¬ 
on this topic, but for the benefit of those who 
are not in the habit of analysing such papers, 
wd propose to append here some of the argu¬ 
ments that have been made upon these docu¬ 
ments by those who have undertaken the de¬ 
fense of the Church against the slanderous 
charges of corruption and apostasy. 

First in order, we present a portion of the 
address of Rev. Dr. Joseph T. Smith, of Bal¬ 
timore, published in the Western Presbyterian 
July 19, 1866 Of course some repetitions in 
the quotations made, end the arguments used 
must necessarily occur in making such extracts. 
We quote from Dr. Smith’s address the cita¬ 
tions from the early acts of the Church; the 
acts of other denominations during the late 
civil war, in favor of the Federal Government, 
and the acts of Southern Churches in support 
of the Confederacy. 

1. The early Deliverances of our Chur¬ 
ches as compared with those of 1861, 
’62, ’63, ’64, ’65. 

And now from this long and tedious review 
we come back to the simple question before 
us. 

The Assembly declares that the Federal Gov¬ 
ernment is that ordinance of God which we 



17 


are bound to reverence and obey ; and that re¬ 
bellion against it is a sin, to be visited upon 
those guilty of it as other sins. These two 
statements embrace in substance the whole. 
And now, without any question as to whether 
they are true or false in themselves, had the 
Church as such, a right to declare and enforce 
them? If not, did it intermeddle with civil 
affairs which concern the Commonwealth in 
such a -waj and so far as to make it an Apos¬ 
tate Church ? 

In reply we remark : 

1st. These Acts are in entire harmony with 
the Acts and Deliverances of our Church from 
its very beginning in this country. And if 
Apostate now, and because of these, then has 
the Presbyterian Church in this land been 
always Apostate. In Baird’s Digest, under 
the caption “Pastoral Letter on occasion of 
the old French War,” before the Assembly was 
organized, the Synod of New York says : 

“We look on ourselves bound, not only as 
members of the community, but by the duty of 
our office, as those who entrusted with the dec¬ 
laration of God’s revealed will, to exhort all to 
implore God’s mercy for themselves, their chil¬ 
dren, country and nation, their and our right¬ 
ful and gracious sovereign, King George the 
Second, his royal family, all officers civil and 
military.” The highest Church court distinct¬ 
ly recognizes the reigning King, “the p wers 
that be,” as “our rightful and gracious sover¬ 
eign.”—Baird’s Digest, p. 820. 

2. Again we find “A Pastoral Letter on the 
the Repeal of the Stamp Act,” in which, after 
speaking of the imposition of unusual taxes, 
ihe severe restrictions on trade, the almost to¬ 
tal stagnation of business and the danger of 
being deprived of the blessing of English liber¬ 
ty, from all which they had been delivered by 
the clemency of the Government, we find these 
words, “You will not ferget to honor your King 
and pay a due submission to his august Par¬ 
liament. Let this fresh instance of royal cle¬ 
mency increase the ardor of your affection to 
the person, family and government of our 
rightful and gracious sovereign. We most 
earnestly recommend it to you to encourage 
and strengthen the hands of Government, to 
demonstrate on every proper occasion your 
undissembled love for your mother country 
and your attachment to her true interest, so 
inseperably connected with your own. Do. 
p. 821, 

Again,on“the Revolutionary War,’’after stat¬ 
ing thatinsuch a crisis as that of impending war 
they felt bound as the highest tribunal of the 
Church, to speak to the congregations under 
their care, and after reviewing the causes 
which led to the war, they go on. in these 
words. First, in carrying on this important 
struggle let every opportunity be taken to ex¬ 
press your attachment and respect to our sov¬ 
ereign, King George, and to the. revolution 
principles by which his august family was sea¬ 
ted on the British throne. Secondly, Be care¬ 


ful to maintain the union which at present 
subsists through all the colonies ; noth¬ 
ing can be more manifest than that the success 
of every measure depends on its being inviola¬ 
bly preserved. In particular as the Conti¬ 
nental Congress now sitting at Philadelphia 
consists of delegates chosen in the most free 
and unbiased manner by the body of the 
people, let them not only be treated with re¬ 
spect and encouraged in their difficult service, 
but adhere firmly to their resolutions, and let 
it be seen that they are able to bring out the 
whole strength of this vast country to carry 
them into execution.”—-Do. p. 823. 

What more has any Assembly said? 

See again “Address to the French Minister 
on the birth of the Dauphin,” and “Address to 
Washington on his election to the Presidency,” 
“Testimony against Persecution in Switzer¬ 
land,” “Petition to Congress on Sabbath Mail,” 
:ind report presented by Dr. Plumer and adop- 
in 1853, from which I quote the three conclu¬ 
ding resolutions: 

4. “Resolved, that this Assembly cordially 
approves of the provisions of a late treaty with 
the Oriental Republic of Uraguay, already 
cited, and trust that the Government of the 
United States will, by treaty, secure the ac¬ 
knowledgment of the same inestimable rights 
by all other governments where it may be prac¬ 
ticable. 

5. “Resolved, That the people of the congre¬ 
gations in our connection be advised to unite 
with their fellow-citizens in urging upon the 
Government of the United States a careful and 
earnest attention to this matter. 

6. “Resolved, That a duly attested copy of 
these resolutions be furnished to the President 
of the United States, to the President of the 
Senate, and to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives of the next Congress for the 
consideration of each of these branches of the 
Government of our country.”—Digest, p. 788. 

And so we submit the Presbyterian Church 
from its very origin, especially during the 
Revolution, the only times parallel to our own, 
has acted on precisely the same principles as 
did the Assembly during our late .civil con¬ 
vulsions. 


Action of other Evangelical Churches. 

2. All Evangelical Churches, both North and 
South, have taken precisely the same position 
and made substantially the same Deliverances 
as our own. 

1. The Congregationalists.—The different 
Congregational bodies in the Eastern, Western 
and Middle States, as all know, with one con¬ 
sent took action, the same in substance, far 
stronger in language than our own. 

2. The Lutherans.—The General Synod of 
the Lutheran Church, in 1862, after a pream¬ 
ble declaring that the rebellion was against 
the lawfully constituted Government, that that 
Government must be sustained as an ordinance 
of God; that they feel bound to express their 



18 


convictions of truth and sustained the great 
interests of law and authority. 

Resolved: 

1. “That it is the deliberate judgment of 
this Synod that the rebellion against the Con¬ 
stitutional Government of this land is most 
wicked in its inception, unjustifiable in its 
cause, inhuman prosecution and destruction 
in its results to the highest interests of mor¬ 
ality and religion. 

2. “That in the suppression of this rebellion 
and in the maintenance of the Constitution 
and Union by the sword, we recognize an un¬ 
avoidable necessity and a sacred duty which 
the Government owes to the nation and to the 
world, and call upon our people to pray for 
‘success to the army and navy, that our belov¬ 
ed land may speedily be delivered from treason 
and anarchy.’ In 1864 the Synod reiterates 
and reaffirms its action.”—McPherson, p 478. 

3. The German Reformed.—The German 
Reformed Synod of Pennsylvania in 1864, re¬ 
solved “that this Convention deems it right 
and proper to give expression to the unfalter¬ 
ing devotion with which the German Reform¬ 
ed Church in the United States has hitherto 
sustained the cause of our common country, 
and we earnestly urge upon our clergy and 
laity to continue to labor and pray for the 
success of the Government in its efforts to.sup¬ 
press the existing rebellion, and to restore 
peace and union.” Do. p. 482, 

The General Synod of the Dutch Reformed 
Church adopted Btill stronger resolutions in 
1863. 

4. The Baptists.—At the General Convention 
of the Baptists in Brooklyn in 1861, it was re¬ 
solved “that the doctrine of secession is for¬ 
eign to our Constitution, revolutionary, suici¬ 
dal, setting out in anarchy and finding its ulti¬ 
mate issue in despotism. 2. That the National 
Government deserves our loyal adhesion and 
unstinted support in its maintenance of the 
national unity and life.” 

The New York Baptist Convention of 1862 
resolved that “as a religious body we deem it 
our duty to cherish and manifest the deepest 
sympathy for the preservation and perpetuity 
of a Government which protects us in the great 
walk of Christian civilization.” Similar reso¬ 
lutions were adopted by the Baptist Conven¬ 
tions of New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Ohio. 
—Do. p. 474. 

5. Methodist Protestant.—The Methodist Pro¬ 
testant Church.at its .General Convention in 
1862 made a deliverance of a tenor precisely 
similar to those of the Baptists.—Do. p. 499. 

6. Methodist Episcopal.—The Methodist Epis¬ 
copal Church in its General Convention in 18- 
64, Resolved, among other things, 

2. “That it is the duty of the Government to 
prosecute the war with all its resources of men 
and money till this wicked rebellion be sub¬ 
dued, the integrity of the nation shall be secur¬ 
ed and its legimate authority shall be estab¬ 
lished, and that we pledge our hearty support 
and co-operation to secure this result. 


o. That we regard slavery as abhorrent to 
the principles of our holy religion, humanity 
and civilization, and that we are in favor of 
such measures as will ‘prohibit slavery or in¬ 
voluntary servitude, except for crime, through¬ 
out all the States and territories of the coun¬ 
try/ ”—Do. p. 498. 

7. Protestant Episcopal. — The Protestant 
Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Pennsyl¬ 
vania in 1864, Resolved, 

“That we hereby declare our unfaltering 
allegiance to the Governnment of the United 
States, and that we pledge it our willing devo¬ 
tion and service,” and will pray that our now 
lacerated country may be so reunited, that, 
“there shall be but one Union, one Govern¬ 
ment, one Flag, one Constitution.” 

In the General Convention of the Protestant 
Episcopal Church in the United States, held 
in New York in 1862, the Committee to whom 
had been referred a number of papers on the 
slate of the country,preface their report, which 
was adopted as the action of the Church on the 
subject, with the remark, that in framing the 
resolutions, “They have designed to leave no 
room for honest doubt, or even for invidious 
misconstruction as to the hearty loyalty of this 
body to the Government of the United States.” 
And further, “There could have been no hesi¬ 
tation under any circumstances in expressing 
now and always our earnest and abiding loy¬ 
alty and devotion to our country, its Constitu¬ 
tion and its laws, and to all its duly constitu¬ 
ted authorities.” Here follows a seiies of re¬ 
solutions expressing their loyalty to the Gov¬ 
ernment, their condemnation of the rebellion 
and hope for the speedy restoration of our be¬ 
loved Union, while at the same time they 
avoided entering upon “any narrow questions, 
which peculiarly belong to the domain of secu¬ 
lar politics.” 

In the long latter of the Bishops to the 
Churches, we find the following: “When St. 
Paul, in direct connection with the words 
just cited, exhorts us to ‘render to all their 
dues, tribute to whom tribute is due, custom 
to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honor to 
whom honor,’ and that ‘not only for wrath, but 
for conscience’ sake/ we have no hesitation in 
teaching that the claim to all these duties and 
manifestations of allegiance and loyalty from 
us and from all those States so recently united 
in rendering them, is rightfully in that Gov¬ 
ernment, which is now by force of arms main¬ 
taining such claim. The refusal of such alle¬ 
giance we hold to be a sin, and when it stands 
forth in armed rebellion, it is a great crime 
before the laws of God, as well as man. This 
Brethren, your Bishops teach as official expo¬ 
sitors of the Word of God. Less they believe 
they could not teach without unfaithfulness to 
the Scriptures.”—Do. 483. 

8. All branches of the Presbyterian Church, 
the United Presbyterian, the Cumberland 
Presbyterian, the New School Presbyterian, 
took precisely the same action. As a specimen 
of all, I read the Deliverance of the Cumber- 



land Presbyterian General Assembly of 1863: 
‘‘Whereas, the Chftrekis the light, of the world, 
and cannot withhold her testimony upon great 
moral and religious questions; Resolved, that 
loyalty and obedience to the General Govern¬ 
ment, in the exercise of its legimate authority, 
are the imperative Christian duties of every 
citizen, and that treason and rebellion are not 
mere political offenses of one section against 
another, but heinous sins against God and his 
authority.”,—Do. p. 473. 

3. Action of Southern Churches favor »■ 
mg the Rebellion. 

We come now to the action of the Evangeli¬ 
cal Churches in the Southern States, all of 
which assumed the same attitude towards the 
Government of the Confederate States, and ex¬ 
pressed towards it the same duties of submis¬ 
sion, loyalty and devotion as an ordinance of 
God. I need not say that the principles in 
question are the same, no matter to what gov¬ 
ernment applied. 

The Alabama Baptist State Convention in 
November, I860, before war had commenced, 
or a single State had seceded, after declaring 
that ‘Hhe Union had failed in importaut partic¬ 
ulars to answer the end for which it was crea¬ 
ted,” continued in these words, “While as yet 
no particular mode of relief is before us, we 
are constrained to declare that we hold our¬ 
selves subject to the call of proper authority 
in defense of the sovereignty and independ¬ 
ence of the State of Alabama, and of her right, 
as a sovereignty, to withdraw iromjckis Union* 
And in this declaration we heartily, deliber¬ 
ately, unanimously and solemnly unite.” Mc¬ 
Pherson, p. 613. 

In the Georgia Baptist Convention of 1861: 
Whereas the State Convention of Georgia, in 
the legitimate exercise of her sovereignty, has 
withdrawn from the confederacy known as the 
United States of America, and for the better 
maintenance of her rights, honor and inde¬ 
pendence, has united with other States in a 
new confederacy under the title of the Con¬ 
federate States of America; and whereas, 
Abraham Lincoln is attempting by force of 
arms to subjugate these States, in violation of 
the fundamental principles of American lib¬ 
erty—therefore Resolved:” then follow reso¬ 
lutions to approve and support the Govern¬ 
ment of the Confederate States, urging the un¬ 
ion of all the people of the South in defense 
of the common cause at whatever cost of trea¬ 
sure or blood. Do. p. 613. 

The Methodist, the Episcopal, and 1 believe 
every Church South, at once j^cpgnised the \e- 
gitimacy of the Government of the Confed¬ 
erate States, and assumed tbwards it the same 
attitude of submission and loyalty which the 
Churches North had assumed towards the Gov¬ 
ernment of the United States. 

2. Some of the very first notes of war, as you 
qre aware, issued from the pulpits of the Old 


School Presbyterian Church. Dr. Thornwell 
and Palmer were universally recognized as 
the leaders of the body, and their voice upon 
all questions was most potential. On the 21st 
of Nov. 1860, in Columbia, S.C., Dr. Thornwell, 
from the pulpit, discussed the theory of the Gov¬ 
ernment, and the relations between the States 
and Federal Government, and advocated the 
political doctrine of States Rights. Dr. Pal¬ 
mer, from his pulpit, in New Orleans, took for 
his theme that it was the Providential trust of 
the South “to conserve and perpetuate the insti¬ 
tution of slavery as now existing,” “with the 
right unchanged by man to go and root itself 
wherever Providence and nature may carry 
it;” and urges the fulfilment of this trust “in 
the face of the utmost possible peril.” “Should 
the madness of the hour appeal to the arbitra¬ 
tion of the sword we will not shrink even from 
the baptism of. fire.” He then review's the 
condition of political parties, and urges Seces¬ 
sion as an immediate and imperative duty. I 
allude to these celebrated sermons because they 
were such potential agencies in precipitating 
the political catastrophe which followed. They 
werfc widely circulated as campaign documents 
the religious papers of the South, almost with¬ 
out exception, echoed their call, and the several 
Presbyteries, one after another, stood prepared 
to renounce all allegiance to the United States 
and transfer to the Confederate States. 

On December 3d, 1860, months before the 
war commenced, the Synod of South Carolina 
declared, “That Synod has no hesitation, there¬ 
fore, in expressing the belief that the people of 
South Carolina are now called upon to imitate 
their Revolutionary forefathers and stand up 
for their rights. We have an humble and abi¬ 
ding confidence that the God whose truth we 
represent, in this conflict will be with us, and 
exhorting our Churches and people to put their 
trust in God and go forward in the solemn 
path of duty which his Providence opens be¬ 
fore them, we Ministers and Elders of the Pres¬ 
byterian Church in South Carolina Synod as¬ 
sembled, would give them our benediction, and 
the assurance that we shall fervently and un¬ 
ceasingly imploi*e for them the care and protec¬ 
tion of Almighty God.” 

In the preamble aud resolutions adopted by 
the Presbytery of Charleston, in July, 1861, 
we find the following: “The relations of the 
State of South Carolina and ten other adjacent 
States, and of the people thereof, with the other 
States and people previously composing the 
United States of America, have been dissolved, 
and the former united in the separate and in¬ 
dependent Government of the Confederate 
Spates pf Araeripq/ 5 The United States Gov¬ 
ernment is spoken of as one “foreign and hos¬ 
tile to our own—“a political power which we, 
in common vfitk our fellow-citizens of all clas¬ 
ses and qll Churches have disowned qnd re¬ 
jected;” calls the Confederate authorities “the 
rightful and legal authorities of the land;” de¬ 
clares that the people of the United States 
“have violated the Constitution under which 


20 


we were originally confederated, and broken 
the covenant entered into by their fathers and 
ours;” and concludes: “We do most heartily, 
with the full approval of our consciences be¬ 
fore our Lord God, unanimously approve the 
action of the States and people of the Confed¬ 
erate States of America.” 

The first General Assembly of the Presbyte¬ 
rian Church in the Confederate States met in 
December 1861. It assumed in all its proceed¬ 
ings that the political bonds which had joined 
them to the United States were sundered, and 
fhat the Confederate States were an indepen¬ 
dent government. Their action throughout 
implicitly—their letter to all the Churches 
throughout the world explicitly—recognized 
the Confederate States as an actual and right¬ 
ful government, thus deciding as a Church the 
the political question then in dispute and un¬ 
settled between them and the United States, 
the decision of which had been committed by 
both parties to the final arbitrament of the 
sword. In the Narrative adopted by that As¬ 
sembly they say, “In the first place we notice 
the relation of our congregations to the great 
struggle in which we are engaged. All the 
Presbyterial Narratives without exception men¬ 
tion the fact, that their congregations have 
evinced the most cordial sympathy with the 
people of the Confederate States, in their ef¬ 
forts to maintain their cherished rights and 
institutions against the despotic power which 
is attempting to crush them. Deeply convinc¬ 
ed that this struggle is not alone for civil 
rights and property and home, but also for 
religion, for the Church, for the Gospel, for 
existence itself, the- Churches in our connec¬ 
tion have freely contributed to its prosecution 
of their substance, their prayers, and above 
all, of their members and the beloved youth 
of their congregations. The Assembly desire 
to record with its solemn approval this fact of 
the unanimity of our people in supporting a 
contest to which Religion, as well as Patrio¬ 
tism, now summons the citizens of this coun¬ 
try, and to implore for them the blessing of 
God in the coursejthey are now pursuing.” 

It is a singular instance of the influence of 
times of great excitement in swerving men 
from the most cherished principles of their 
lives, and one which ought to teach us char¬ 
ity for each other, that our Southern brethren 
who had so long and loudly declared that sla¬ 
very was a political question, with which the 
Church might not intermeddle, should pro¬ 
claim to the world, as they did in 1864, that 
“it is the peculiar mission of the Southern 
Church to conserve the institution of slavery.” 
And we submit that ou* affirmation is made 
good—all Evangelical Churches in the coun¬ 
try, both North and South, during the recent 
troubles, took precisely the same ground as our 
General Assembly. 


We next quote from Dr. E- P. Humphrey*s 
address before the Presbytery of Louisville, 
delivered in the Chestnut Street Church, Lou¬ 
isville, July 12, 1866. 

The Great Issues Stated. 

It is proper to state at the outset that Dr. 
ffm. L. Breckinridge and myself were mem¬ 
bers of the last General Assembly of our 
Church. The Presbytery of Louisville, now 
in session here, has desired that both of us 
shall appear before it at this time, in explana¬ 
tion of the present position of our ecclesias¬ 
tical affairs. I regret to say that my distin¬ 
guished friend, Dr. Breckinridge is detained 
at home by sickness, and cannot therefore ap*- 
pear with me on this occasion. I have been 
greatly strengthened in my personal convict¬ 
ions upon this whole subject by the fact that 
mine are his convictions also; and I need not 
tell the people of this city how much rever¬ 
ence is due to that singularly pure and upright 
man—that faithful servant of the Church. All 
this increases my regret that we are deprived 
at this time of his presence and the wisdom of 
his counsels. Unhappily, in this discussion 
our own brethren are our opposers — many 
of whom we have trusted and loved, whom 
we still love, and will love to the end. This 
fact ought to restrain ns from the use of 
language unbecoming the Christian minister 
in a discussion with his brethren. I desire to 
bear this in mind. It will be my endeavor, in 
what I have to say, to make, not a controversial 
speech, but a plain and simple explanation. I 
offer you not a dispute, or even an argument, 
but a statement of the case. 

NATURE OF THE QUESTION. 

Let me here say that this discussion turns 
not upon the doctrines of grace, or the way of 
salvation, or on the ordinances of worship, or 
ou the frame of Church government; but sim¬ 
ply upon certain acts of the Assembly touch¬ 
ing the late civil war. 

It is not on the one hand a political, nor on 
the other a strictly doctrinal question; but it is 
eccesiastical, a question of Church law and 
polity. And the remarkable fact is that the 
strifes which now agitate our Church root 
themselves in two issues, both of which are 
dead. The late rebellion is one—that has 
ceased; slavery is another—that too is extir¬ 
pated forever. It is a humiliating reflection 
that Christians, and even Christian ministers 
should be found fighting over the grave in 
which those old things that have passed away 
are about to be hidden. Would to God that all 
of us, on both sides, might speedily find grace 
to oboy the words of Christ: “Follow me, and 
let the dead bury their dead.” 

RELATION OF THR CHURCH TO PUBLIC AFFAIRS. 

Now, I will explain to you, in the first place, 
what I understand to be the relation of the 



21 


Church to public affairs. The radical princi¬ 
ples are these: 

1. The Church and the State are, both of 
them, ordinances of God. 

2. The province of each is separate and 
distinct. The Church exists for the salvation 
of sinners—the State for the temporal welfare 
of its citizens. The Church ought not to be 
predominant over the State, which is pure pa¬ 
pacy ; nor subordinate to the State, which is 
Erastianism; nor simply tolerated bv the State, 
which is semi-Erastianism ; but wholly inde¬ 
pendent of the State, which is the American 
theory. 

3. Subjects which are purely secular in their 
nature belong exclusively to the State. Ques¬ 
tions of the tariff, of banks, income taxes, 
suffrage, the army and navy, and the like, fall 
undei the sole jurisdiction of the State, and 
any attempt on the part of the Church to de¬ 
termine them ought to be resisted. So, also, 
subjects which are purely spiritual belong ex¬ 
clusively to the .Church. Questions of reveal¬ 
ed religion, such as the doctrine of the Trini¬ 
ty and the Atonement, the mode of worship, 
the sacraments, and the way of Church gov¬ 
ernment, and the like, fall under the jurisdic¬ 
tion of the Church; and any attempt of the 
State to meddle with them ought to be rebuked. 
But there are subjects which may be called 
mixed , being in some of their aspects secular 
and in other aspects religious. Here the rule 
is obvious. In mixed cases all those aspects 
which are secular beloug to the State, and 
must be determined by the civil tribunal; all 
those aspects which are spiritual belong to the 
Church, and must be turned over to the eccle¬ 
siastical courts. 

APPLICATION OF THIS DOCTRINE. 

Now apply these principles to the position 
of our Church towards the late rebellion. 
That was a mixed case. In all its secular as¬ 
pects, the rebellion belonged to the Govern¬ 
ment. The difficult and much disputed consti¬ 
tutional questions, the powers and duties per¬ 
taining to Congress and to the courts of justice 
and to the Executive, the organization and con¬ 
trol cf the army and navy, the mode of deal¬ 
ing with slavery and the writ of habeas corp¬ 
us and martial law, as war questions all these 
belonged to the State, and it would have been 
an impertinence in the Church to meddle with 
them. But the rebellion presented aspects 
purely moral and religious. Obedience to the 
powers that be and that are ordaiued of God 
submission to lawful and constitutional author¬ 
ity, the duty of the civil magistrate to enforce 
the laws,the duty of Christians not to obstruct or 
hinder, but to aid and assist the magistrate in 
this high office—these were the moral and reli¬ 
gious aspects of the civil war, and as such they 
belonged to the Church. So long as no moral 
questions were involved in the contest, the 
Church had nothing whatever to do with it; 
but the moment that questions of right and 


wrong, of obedience to God, of immutable and 
eternal morality, emerged from the crash of 
arms, then instantly the Church was called on 
to speak out. I would not give offense to any, 
but I must tell you the truth. Our Church 
considered the rebellion wrong in point of 
morals, a sin against God, and for that reason 
it took jurisdiction of the case in that aspect 
of it Not that all who went into the rebellion 
were guilty of immorality and known sin. I 
do not say that. The question of personal sin¬ 
fulness depends upon a variety of circumstan¬ 
ces—upon knowledge of God’s Word, upon the 
point of view from which the facts are exam¬ 
ined, and upon the inward intent and motive. 
I am not now speaking of men. I judge no 
man. But I am considering the thing itself in 
its own inherent nature; and I repeat that our 
Church held the rebellion to be morally wrong, 
and on that ground the General Assembly con¬ 
demned it year by year. For proof of the fact 
that the Assembly followed this clear and dis¬ 
criminating doctrine of its proper functions, I 
refer you to a paper adopted by the St. Louis 
Assembly. Here is an extract: “In regard to 
our deliverances on these subjects (slavery and 
the rebellion), the Assembly here contents it¬ 
self as sufficient with declaring that it has but 
exercised the constitutional right and duty of 
the Assembly, which has been constantly ex¬ 
ercised from the time of our fathers; who made 
the Constitution of our Church to utter its senti¬ 
ments, warnings and exhortations on all poin ts 
and questions which, while we are properly 
restrained from invading the jurisdiction of 
civil tribunals, do nevertheless belong to that 
class of questions which we may handle, viz: 
those moral and religious questions, although 
they may embrace points in which politics, 
whether in their larger or lesser sense, are 
involved; because while relating to civil and 
political affairs, they are also questions of re¬ 
ligious duty, and cannot be thrown out of the 
religious jurisdiction.” This is the Assembly’s 
own exposition of the subject. 

THE HISTORICAL ARGUMENT. 

Nor, let me further explain, is the doctrine or 
the practice under it a novelty in our Church. 
About the middle of the last century, the French 
entered into a conspiracy with the savages of 
this Western country, the bloody and brutal 
purpose of which was to exterminate the white 
settlement of the West. The struggle that fol¬ 
lowed is known as the Old French War. Brad- 
dock s defeat, and the cruelties inflicted by the 
savages who were taken as prisoners, occurred 
in 1755. Our highest Church judicatories at 
that time were the Synod of New York and the 
Synod of Philadelphia. These two Synods— 
the first in 1755 and the second in 1757—took 
into consideration “the dangerous condition of 
the country,” “the melancholy condition of the 
British (or American) colonies and their al¬ 
lies.” denounced, in so many words, the “cruel, 
potent and prevailing enemy,” and “the shock¬ 
ing depredations and barbarities of the heathen 


22 


on our borders, influenced and attended by the 
perfidious, restless enemies of our civil and re¬ 
ligious liberties. Both of these Synods ex¬ 
pressed, also, sentiments of true allegiance to 
the Government of George II, and one of them 
ordered prayers to be made for our fleets and 
armies and those of our allies. That was the 
Presbyterianism of our fathers one hundred 
years ago' 

You know the history of the American Rev¬ 
olution, how in 1766 the Synod of New York 
and Philadelphia, then our highest Church 
tribunal, took decisive action upon the repeal 
of the stamp act; how in 1775 the Synod, un¬ 
der the leadership of the illustrious John With¬ 
erspoon, took the side of ihe country against 
the King, and exhorted the “Presbyterian peo¬ 
ple of God,” to be prayerful and brave, hu¬ 
mane and merciful, especially on the field of 
battle. “That man will fight most bravely,” 
said the noble old Synod, “who never fights 
till it is necessary, and who ceases to fight 
when the necessity is over.” Time would fail 
me to tell you of the Presbyterian ministers 
who stood by the right and good cause in the 
pulpit and in the council chamber and on the 
field of battle: of Witherspoon and Alison in 
Baltimore, Tennant in Charleston, Miller at 
Dover, Duffield in Philadelphia, James Waddell 
and John Blair Smith in Virginia, “who led 
the way in vindicating, from the pulpit the 
cause of American freedom-”—Gillet, vol. 1., 
p. 181;—of John Witherspoon, who signed the 
Declaration of Independence, saying: “Al¬ 
though these gray hairs must descend to the 
sepulchre, I would infinitely rather they should 
descend thither by the hand of the public ex¬ 
ecutioner than desert at this crisis the cause of 
my countryof John Craighead, who, it is 
said, “fought and preached alternately;” of 
George Duffield, who went to the front to preach 
to the soldiers, and when the echo of the sing¬ 
ing drew upon them the fire of the enemy, he 
led the soldiers over a hill, and there finished 
his sermon; of James Caldwell, who preached 
with a price set upon his head—a price that 
afterward was gained by a Hessian, who shot 
him dead; of John Blair Smith, of Hampden 
Sidney College, Virginia, who enlisted a com¬ 
pany of his students, and hurried them to the 
front; of William Graham, John Brown and 
Archibald Scott, all of them Virginia preach¬ 
ers, who exhorted the young men of their con¬ 
gregations to rise, arm themselves, and march 
to the Blue Ridge to dispute with the invader 
the passage of Rock-fish Gap—Graham him¬ 
self eulisting, and taking the post of Captain 
in his company of gallant Presbyterian boys. 

I might occupy this whole night till sunrise 
with the grand record of Christian patriotism 
which the Presbyterian Church of the revolu¬ 
tionary period has left, behind it. Brethren, 
“your fathers’ blood cries to you from the 
ground.” 

This imposing statement will be made com¬ 
plete when I remind you that the present con¬ 
stitution of our Church was adopted about the 


same time and in the same city, Philadelphia, 
when and where the Federal Constitution was 
framed; that the First General Asssmbly of 
the Church was held in 1789, during the ses¬ 
sion of our First Congress; and that among 
the acts of that First Assembly a letter of con¬ 
gratulation, drawn by John Witherspoon and 
instinct with the purest spirit of Christian 
liberty, was sent to President Washington. 
The truth is, that the history of our republican 
institutions and the history of the Presbyte¬ 
rian Church are inseparably intertwined with 
each other. And in the distribution of the 
honors which posterity will award to our 
Church, in this immortal story, a large share 
will fall to the Presbyterians in Virginia and 
the Carolinas and Georgia. When I remember 
that this Church had, from time immemorial, 
taught her sons to reverence our institutions 
as ordained of God, I do not wonder that they 
sought her blessing when they rushed to arms 
in the late civil war. I think a Church with 
such a historical crown upon her august and 
venerable brow may be pardoned if she lifted 
up her majestic form and shook out to the light 
her unsullied aud radiant jewels and then 
gave her blessing to these gallant boys. I for 
one, will not quit the Church for that. 


The following extracts arc from the editorial 
columns of the Western Presbyterian. 

The charge of prostituting the sacred office 
of the ministry by political preaching, ans¬ 
wered by a reference to the course of the no¬ 
blest Presbyterians of former times : 

Now we affirm here, and are prepared to 
prove it from the records, that in respect of 
all these matters , the ministers of our Church at 
the present day, have not gone a whit beyond 
the Fathers of American Presbyterianism. 

They have not preached “politics in the pul¬ 
pit” any more openly and boldly than the very 
wisest and most godly men among our Fathers 
did ! 

The course of Dr. Witherspoon is familiar to 
to every intelligent Presbyterian. He was p. 
member of Ihe Continental Congress and took 
an active part iu the deliberations of that bo¬ 
dy during the whole eventful period of the 
Revolution. Rev. John Brainerd, one of the 
most godly and self-sacrificing men of the 
Church—a biography of whom was reviewed 
in our columns a few weeks since—preached a 
sermon to encourage volunteers for the Patriot 
Army ! Dr. Sam Davies, whose fervid eloquence 
and holy zeal, has made his name praise in all 
the churches throughout Christendom, preach¬ 
ed some of his eloquent discourses, enforcing 
the duty of the citizen to support the Govern¬ 
ment; the duty of young and able-bodied men 
to volunteer in defense of their country in 
t;me of war; the duty to God of waging war 
when there is just cause; and the sin of cow¬ 
ardice in shrinking from military service. 
We are tempted to quote a few passages from 



23 


his printed sermons, which are published in 
three volumes; and found in almost every 
minister’s library. In a sermon delivered at 
Princeton College, January 14, 1761, on the 
death of George the Second, he thus inculcates 
the duty of praying for rulers. “In praying 
for this one great personage, we intercede not 
only for him, but for ourselves, and millions 
on both sides of the Atlantic; not only for 
individuals but for nations, for Europe and 
America, for the world ! And may petitions 
of such immense import never languish into 
spiritless, complimental formalities! May they 
exhaust all the vigor of our souls, and be al¬ 
ways animated with the united ardors of de¬ 
votion, patriotism and loyalty 1” Devotion, 
patriotism and loyalty 1” 

How strange such words must appear to the 
eye of one educated in the modern school of 
pure spirituality! What a scathing would 
have poured from the eloquent lips of this 
Prince of American preachers upon the beads 
of men who could scoff loyalty and patriotism as 
a Christian duty I The sermon above quoted 
closes with this pointed address to the students 
of the College: “Your education both at home 
and in Nassau Hall, has invincibly preengaged 
your inclination, your reason and your con¬ 
science in favor of our incomparable constitu¬ 
tion, and the succession of the Hanover family; 
of liberty, the Protestant religion, and George 
the Third, which are inseparably united. There¬ 
fore act up to your principles, practice accor¬ 
ding to your political creed, and then my most 
benevolent wishes, nay, the highest wishes of 
your King and fellow-subjects, will be accom¬ 
plished in you. Then you will give to the 
world an honorable and just specimen of the 
morals and politics inculcated in the college of 
New Jersey; and convince them that it is a 
seminary of loyalty, as well as learning and 
piety, a nursery for the State as well as the 
Church.” 

Another sermon preached by this distin¬ 
guished man to “Captain Overton’s indepen¬ 
dent company of volunteers, raised in Hanover 
county, Va., August 17, 1755,” closes with a 
stirring appeal, of which the following is a part: 
“May the Lord of Hosts, the God of the armies 
of Israel, go forth along with you I May He 
teach your hands to war, and gird you with 
strength, to battle !” About three years after¬ 
wards, Mr. Davies preached again to the Han¬ 
over militia on the curse of cowardice. In ans¬ 
wer to the idea that war is inconsistent with 
the sentiments of religion, he exclaims: “Is 
the cause of peace then our only business? No: 
in such a time, even the God of Peace pro¬ 
claims by his providence, “To arms I” Then 
the sword is, as it were, consecrated to God ; 
and the art of war becomes a part of our reli¬ 
gion. Blessed is the brave soldier I Blessed 
are they who offer themselves willingly in this 
service and who faithfully discharge it.” 

-» * * # 

“The man that can desert the cause of his 
country in such an exigency; his country, in 


the blessings of which he shared while in peace 
aud prosperity, and which is therefore entitled 
to his sympathy and assistance in the day of 
its distress; that cowardly, ungrateful man 
sins against God and his country and deserves 
the curse of both. Such a conduct in such a 
conjuncture is a moraljevil, a gross wickedness: 
and exposes the wretch to the heavy curse of 
God, both in this and the eternal world.” 

This will do for a specimen. This is the 
fashion after which the Fathers of the Pres¬ 
byterian church in America delivered them¬ 
selves from the pulpit when their country was 
in danger. We recommend those who are 
troubled with visions of the “gospel of blood” 
aDd “political preachers,” hereafter to take 
Samuel Davies for a text. 

Now, we reaffirm that the ministry of our 
church, in preaching from the pulpit the duty 
of upholding the Government, have not gone a 
whit beyond their Fathers—the great and the 
good men of the Church, a ! undred years ago. 
Aud we have given the extracts above, simply 
as an illustration in proof of what we assert. 
Loyalty and patrotism; supporting aud main¬ 
taining their government., even to the extent 
of prosecuting a vigorous and courageous war, 
were enforced by them, from the pulpit, as 
Christian duties. It may be suggested that 
this was all wrong; that these good men went 
beyond the limits of their high vocation in 
preaching thus. Grant it, for the sake of ar¬ 
gument. The wrong was in the Church when 
you joined it, and took its solemn covenant 
vows upon you. Nay, more, these same men 
—Witherspoon aud Davies and Brainerd and 
a host of others who preached as they did, have 
been the pride and boast of the Presbyterian 
church for a century past! We venture the 
opinion that there is not an iutelligent Pres¬ 
byterian in Kentucky who has not. felt a glow 
of pride at the mention of these houored names! 
And now, brethren in Kentucky, do you pro¬ 
pose to abandon the church you have loved, and 
whose peace, purity, aud unity you have cove¬ 
nanted to preserve, because there are ministers 
among us who did, in the hour of their coun¬ 
try’s peril precisely ivhal was done under simi¬ 
lar circumstances by your Fathers, whom you 
have delighted to honor ? 

The principles involved in the late Deliverances, 
the same as those involved in former Deliverances 
of the Church on similar occasions. 

What we have to say here then, upon the 
deliverances of the Assembly, has reference 
to the authority of the Church to teach men 
what is right, and warn them against what is 
wrong', and the point at issue is, whether, in 
this respect, the Assembly lias departed from 
the ancient testimonies of the Cuurch. This 
■we deny. Now the proof. To present the mat¬ 
ter plainly and briefly, let us make a careful 
analysis of the principles involved in the suc¬ 
cessive Acts of the Assembly. 

(a.) The deliverance of 1801: involves the 
principle that, the Church has uu'hority to 


24 


teach men the duty of rendering allegiance to a 
particular civil government. See minutes of 1861, 
page 329, Res. 2. 

(b.) The deliverance of 1862: Involves the 
principle that the Church may properly teach 
men that it is their duty to draw the sword in 
defense of their government and in the maintenance 
of their rightful authority. See minutes of 1862, 
page 626. 

(c.) Deliverance of 1863: Is in substance 
a reaffirmation of the deliverances of the two 
previous Assemblies, with the principles in¬ 
volved in them. See minutes 1863, p. 60. 

(d.) Deliverance of 1864: In regard to 
slavery, asserts (1.) that the time is now come 
to abolish it; and this, (2.) on the grounds of 
certain acts of those in arms against the gov¬ 
ernment, which acts are, by implication, con¬ 
demned; and on the ground of certain acts of 
the Federal Government, which acts it may be 
said perhaps, by implication, to approve. See 
minutes of 1864, p, 297. 

The above analysis we believe covers the 
whole ground, and fairly develops every contes¬ 
ted principle involved in the successive deliv¬ 
erances of the Assembly on Slavery and the 
State of the Country. And we here distinctly 
repeat the ground we take: That there is not 
a principle involved in all these acts , which is not 
likewise involved in the ancient testimonies and 
deliverances of the Presbyterian Church! First, 
as to the principle that the Church has author¬ 
ity to teach men the duty of allegiance to a 
particular government. In 1766, the General 
Synod—which twenty-two years afterwards 
became the General Assembly—addressed a 
“ Pastoral Letter” to the churches and people 
under its care, on the occasion of the “repeal 
of the Stamp Act.” Let the historic period be 
carefully noted. The storms of revolution were 
gathering. Great Britain had entered upon 
that, course of unjust legislation which ended 
in the independence of the American colonies 
Men already began to talk freely of renounc¬ 
ing their allegiance to the mother country. 
The Stamp Act, so justly odious to Americans, 
had through the influence of a few noble men 
in the British Parliament, been lately repealed. 
Whereupon this “Pastoral Letter,” whLh clo¬ 
ses in the following language : “While we thus 
call upon you to fear God, you will not forget 
to honor your King, and pay a due submission 
to his august parliament. * * * 

We most earnestly recommend it to you to 
encourage and strengthen the hands of the 
government, to demonstrate on every proper 
occasion your undissembled love for your mo¬ 
ther country, and your attachment to her true 
interest, so inseparably connected with your 
own. That thus you may become wise and 
good as well as free and happy, and that while 
you enjoy liberty, civil and religious, you may 
not be the servants of sin and Satan, is the 
fervent prayer of those who watch for your 
souls as men who must give an account.” El- 
lihu Spencer, Moderator.” Now note; this 
Pastoral Letter—this “ancient testimony” of 


the Church—delivered just one hundred years 
ago—enjoins upon its people the duty of alle¬ 
giance to the British Throne and Parliament. 
And that too not in the “piping times of peace,” 
but when the storms of war were brooding ! 
This is precisely similar to what was done by 
the General Assembly of the same Church in 
1861—nearly a century later. 

The principle involved is the same in both 
cases, to wit: the authority of the Church to 
teach men the duty of obedience to a particular 
civil government. And for this act the “Dec¬ 
laration and Testimony” charges the Assembly 
with going to the very verge of apostasy ! 

Who has departed from the “old land¬ 
marks ?” 

It will be observed that this Pastoral Letter 
was prepared several years before the Declara¬ 
tion of Independence. Afterwards, when Bri¬ 
tish aggression had forced the colonies to ab¬ 
solve their allegiance to the British Crown, the 
Presbyterian Church cordially supported the 
cause of their country. Of this, their records 
gave unequivocal evidence. 


Our Confession of Faith. 

The public mind has become quite familiar 
of late with the fourth section, thirty-first 
chapter, of our Confession of Faith, which 
reads as follows: 

“Synods and Councils are to handle or con¬ 
clude nothing, but that which is ecclesiastical; 
and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs 
which concern the commonwealth, unless by 
way of humble petition in cases extraordina¬ 
ry; or by way of advice for satisfaction of 
conscience, if they be thereunto required by 
the civil magistrate.” 

The use made of this clause in our Stand¬ 
ards, by the Declaration and Testimony party, 
is to prove that the General Assembly, and the 
church generally, have violated this part of 
the Constitution ; and to that extent have de¬ 
parted from “the old landmarks.” But there 
are certain portions of the Confession of 
Faith which we observe the brethren of this 
way of thinking never quote, or even allude 
to. And what makes this omission appear 
the more singular, is the fact that there are 
parts of the Confession which do teach, with 
exact particularity, upon the very questions 
in controversy. The matters in dispute 
tftnongst us have reference chiefly to these two 
questions: first, what are the duties of Chris¬ 
tians in the matter of citizenship? And 
second, what limits are prescribed to the 
Church, in teaching and enforcing these du¬ 
ties? These are precisely the questions about 
which they say the Assembly and the Church 
have erred so egregiously; and they are, 
moreover, precisely the subjects upon which 
our Standards teach very clearly and explicit¬ 
ly. Why then are these parts of our Book 
never quoted—never even alluded to, in their 
discussions? Without attempting to answer 
the question, we propose to quote some of the 



25 


passages bearing on these important topics.— 
Con. of Faith , ch. xxm, sec. 1 and 2 “Of the 
Civil Magistrate.” 

I. “God, the Supreme Lord and King of all 
the world, hath ordained civil magistrates to 
be under him over the people, for his own 
glory and (he public good, and to this end, 
hath armed them with the power of the sword, 
for the defense and encouragement of them 
that are good, and for the punishment of evil¬ 
doers. 

II. “It is lawful for Christians to accept and 
execute the office of a magistrate, when called 
thereunto ; in the managing whereof, as they 
ought especially to maintain piety, justice and 
peace, according to the wholesome laws of 
each Commonwealth, so, for that eud, they 
may lawfully, now under the New Testament, 
wage war upon just and necessary occasions.” 
Again, “It is the duty of civil magistrates to 
protect the person and good name of all their 
people,” &c.—Sec. III. And again, “It is the 
duty of the people to pray for magistrates, to 
honor their persons, and to pay them tribute 
and other dues, to obey their lawful com¬ 
mands, and to be subject to their authority for 
conscience’s sake”.—Sec. IV. 

In the Larger Catechism we have an expo¬ 
sition of the fifth commandment. The an¬ 
swer to question 124, defines those embraced 
in it, besides “natural parents,” to be “es¬ 
pecially such as by God’s ordinance are over 
us in place of authority, whether in family, 
church or commonwealth' ’ The answer to ques¬ 
tion 127, defines the honor due to these supe¬ 
riors, thus, “all due reverence in heart, word 
and behavior; prayer and thanksgiving for 
them; imitation of their virtues and graces; 
willing obedience to their lawful commands 
and councils; due submission to their correc 
tions,” &c. Answer to question 128, defines 
the “sins” against superiors (civil magistrates 
included) to be, “all neglect of the duties re¬ 
quired toward them ; envying at, contempt of, 
and rebellion against, their persons andplrces, 
in their lawful commands, counsels, and cor¬ 
rections,” &c. The duties of “superiors” are 
also defined to be, “discountenancing, reprov¬ 
ing and chastising such as do ill,” &c. And 
their sins, “careless exposing, or leaving 
them to wrong, temptation and danger/' &c. 

Such is the teaching of our Standards re¬ 
specting the duties of the civil magistrate, and 
of good citizenship. Now, we will cheerfully 
surrender the use of our columns to any one 
who will point out exactly wherein our Church 
has gone beyond these plain directions of her 
Constitution, in her late deliverances. Of 
course we always except that part of the act 
of 1861, which was ambiguous, and which 
was modified by the act of 1862. This latter 
act declared it to be the duty of the “civil 
magistrate” to maintain the authority of the 
government by the sword. For this it has 
been denounced as a “gospel of blood.” But 
our Standards say the Christian magistrate 
may “lawfully wage war upon just and neces¬ 


sary occasions.*’ Moreover, it is his duty to 
“chastise such as do ill;” and he is guilty oi 
sin , if he fails in this duty, and thereby ex¬ 
poses the people to wrong and danger. Again 
we ask, wherein has the Church violated her 
Constitution? We go farther, and ask, would 
she not violate her Constitution, in its spirit 
and letter, if she failed to teach men their 
duty in these matters? For this Constitution 
is her system of doctrine—her accepted inter¬ 
pretation of the word of God—which she is 
bound by solemn vows to receive and teach 

In conclusion we make briefly two observa¬ 
tions: (1) It is plain from the above extracts 
from our Standards, that the framers of them 
did not understand it to be “intermeddling 
with civil affairs which concern the Common¬ 
wealth,” or “handling or concluding things 
not ecclesiastical,” when they taught that the 
civil magistrate might lawfully wage war; 
that it is the duty of Christian citizens to pray 
for him, obey him, and maintain his authori¬ 
ty ; and that it is a sin not to perform these 
duties, and to rebel against him. Evidently 
they did not consider these things as belong¬ 
ing to the State exclusively, and that they had 
no right to handle them. For we see how 
plainly they did handle them. 

(2) The Fathers of the Presbyterian Church 
in this country, interpreted these Standards in 
the same way that we have done. They de¬ 
cided that the struggle of the American colo¬ 
nies for independence was one of those “just 
and necessary occasions” on which the civil 
magistrate might “lawfully wage war;” that 
it was the duty of their people to support the 
Continental Congress, and maintain its au¬ 
thority, &c. 

The Old Scotch Church—the mother of us 
all—carried the application of this doctrine 
to the extent of deposing men from the minis¬ 
try for being engaged in rebellion. 

It is perfectly evident, therefore, that our 
Declaration and Testimony brethren, whether 
right or wrong, have themselves departed 
from the “old landmarks.” They, not we, are 
following after new doctrines. 


II. ON SLAVERY. 

We ask the reader to refer to that part of the 
Declaration and Testimony quoted at the be¬ 
ginning of this tract which charges the As¬ 
sembly with teaching a new doctrine on Sla¬ 
very—“ a system,” it says, “ which has always 
existed in the Church uncondemned; and which 
it declares “ was recognized and sanctioned by 
Christ and his Apostles.” We beg the read¬ 
er, as he peruses the following deliverances of 
the Church, covering a period of three quar¬ 
ters of a century, to bear in mind these asser¬ 
tions of the Assembly’s accusers. “Always 
uncondemned ” by the Church! “Sanctioned 



26 


by Christ and his Apostles”!! In order that 
the sentiment of the Church on this subject 
may be fairly judged, we propose to give the 
entire body of its deliverances from 1787 to 
1866, and in their chronological order. They 
are copied from Baird’s Digest. 

J. The first formal action on the subject 
was in 1787, and is as follows: 

“The following was brought in by the Com¬ 
mittee of Overtures: 

“The Creator of the world having made of 
one flesh all the children of men, it becomes 
them, as members of the same family, to con¬ 
sult and promote each other’s happiness. It 
is more especially the duty of those who main¬ 
tain the rights of humanity, and who acknowl¬ 
edge and teach the obligations of Christiani¬ 
ty, to use such means as are in their power to 
extend the blessings of equal freedom to eve¬ 
ry part of the human race 

“From a full conviction of these truths, and 
sensible that the rights of human nature are 
too well understood to admit of debate, Over¬ 
ture’d, that the Synod of New York and Phila¬ 
delphia recommend, in the warmest terms, to 
every member of their body, and to all the 
Churches and families under their care, to do 
everything in their power consistent with the 
rights of civil society, to promote the abolition 
of slavery, and the instruction of negroes, 
whether bond or free.” 

The Synod, taking into consideration the 
overture concerning slavery, transmitted by 
the Committee of Overtures last Saturday, 
came to the following judgment: 

“The Synod of New York and Philadelphia 
do highly approve of the general principles in 
favor of universal liberty, that prevail in 
America, and the interest which many of the 
States have taken in promoting the abolition 
of slavery; yet, inasmuch as men introduced 
from a servile state to a participation of all 
the privileges of civil society, without a prop¬ 
er education, and without previous habits of 
industry, may be, in many respects, danger¬ 
ous to the community, therefore they earnestly 
recommend to all the members belonging to 
their communion, to give those persons who 
are at present held in servitude such good ed¬ 
ucation as to prepare them for the better en¬ 
joyment of freedom; and they moreover 
recommend that masters, wherever they find 
servants disposed to make a just improvement 
of the privilege, would give them a peculium, 
or grant them sufficient time and sufficient 
means of procuring their own liberty at a 
moderate rate, that thereby they may be 
brought into society with those habits of in¬ 
dustry that may render them useful citizens; 
and. finally, they recommend it to all their 
people to use the most prudent measures, con¬ 
sistent with the interest and ihe state of so¬ 
ciety, in the counties where they live, to pro¬ 
cure eventually the final abolition of slavery 


in America.”— Minutes , May 28th, 1787, p. 

510 

In 1793 the General Assembly re affirmed 
this deliverance in the following terms: “ Or¬ 
dered, that the records of the General Synod 
of the year 1787, on the subject of Slavery, 
be published among the extracts to be print¬ 
ed of the proceedings of this Assembly.” 

2. The next action ha3 reference to the ques¬ 
tion of communing with slaveholders; Ought 
those who are guilty of holding slaves to be 
admitted to the communion table? Ought 
Christians to commune with such? It will be 
seen that this question was introduced from 
the Presbytery of Transylvania , Kentucky . 
Let those who charge “radicalism” on the 
present members of the Synod of Kentucky 
bear this fact in mind. The following is the 
action adopted with the letter to Transylvania 
Presbytery: 

“A serious and conscientious person, a 
member of a Presbyterian congregation, who 
views the slavery of the negroes as a moral 
evil, highly offensive to God, and injurious to 
the interests of the gospel, lives under the 
ministry of a person, or amongst a society of 
people who concur with him in sentiment on 
the subject upon general principles, yet for 
particular reasons hold slaves, and tolerate 
the practice in others. Over lured, ought the 
former of these per ons, under the impressions 
and circumstances above described, to hold 
Christian communion with the latter?” 

“After due deliberation, it was 

“1. Resolved , That as the same difference of 
opinion with respect to slavery takes place in 
sundry other parts of the Presbyterian 
Church, notwithstanding which they live in 
charity and peace according to the doctrine 
and practice of the Apostles, it is hereby recom¬ 
mended to all conscientious persons, and es¬ 
pecially to those whom it immediately re¬ 
spects, to do the same. At the same time, the 
General Assembly assure all the Churches un¬ 
der their care, that they view with the deep¬ 
est concern, any vestiges of slavery which 
may exist, in our country, and refer the 
Churches to the records of the General As¬ 
sembly published at different times, but es¬ 
pecially to an overture of the late Synod of 
New York and Philadelphia, published in 
1787, and republished among the extracts 
from the Minutes of the General Assembly of 
1793, on that head, with which they trust 
every conscientious person will be fully sat¬ 
isfied. 

“2. Resolved , That Mr. Rice and Dr. Muir, 
Ministers, and Mr. Robert Patterson, anElder, 
be a committee to draught a letter to the 
Presbytery of Transylvania, on the,subject of 
the above overture.” 


27 


“The committee appointed to prepare a 
draught of a letter to the Presbytery of 
Transylvania, reported a draught, 'which be¬ 
ing read and debated for some time, a motion 
■was made, Shall this draught of a letter be 
read and debated by paragraphs, or not? The 
vote being taken, the question was carried in 
the affirmative. The consideration of the 
draught was resumed, and after very consid¬ 
erable time spent therein, it was amended and 
adopted, and ordered to be signed, and sent to 
the Presbytery of Transylvania by their Com¬ 
missioners.”— Minutes , 1795, pp. 103, 104. 

THE LETTER. 

To our brethren , members of the Presbyterian 

Church , under the care of Transylvania Pres- 

bytery: 

Dear Friends and Brethren: —The Gen¬ 
eral Assembly of the Presbyterian Church 
hear with concern from your Commissioners, 
that differences of opinion, with respect to 
holding Christian communion with those pos¬ 
sessed of slaves, agitate the minds of some 
among you, and threaten divisions which may 
have the most ruinous tendency. The subject 
of slavery has repeatedly claimed the atten¬ 
tion of the General Assembly, and the Com¬ 
missioners from the Presbytery of Transyl¬ 
vania are furnished with attested copies of 
these decisions, to be read by the Presbytery 
when it shall appear to them proper, together 
with a copy of this letter, to the several 
Churches under their care. 

The General Assembly have taken every 
step which they deemed expedient or wise, to 
encourage emancipation, and to render the 
state of those who are in slavery as mild and 
tolerable as possible. 

Forbearance and peace are frequently in¬ 
culcated in the New Testament: “Blessed are 
the peace-makers:” “Let no one do anything 
through strife and vain-glory:” “Let each es¬ 
teem others better than himself.” The fol¬ 
lowers of Jesus ought conscientiously to walk 
worthy of their vocation, “with all lowliness 
and meekness, with long suffering, forbearing 
one another, endeavoring to keep the unity of 
the Spirit in the bond of peace.” If every 
difference of opinion were to keep men at a 
distance, they could subsist in no state of so¬ 
ciety, either civil or religious. The General 
Assembly would impress this upon the minds 
of their brethren, and urge them to follow 
peace, and the things which make for peace. 

The General Assembly commend our dear 
friends and brethren to the grace of God, pray¬ 
ing tl at the peace of God, which passetli all 
understanding, may possess their hearts and 
minds. 

Signed by order of the Assembly.— Minutes, 
1795, p. 105. 

3. Severity to slaves: selling them. The 
following minutes were adopted 1816: 

The committee to which was committed the 
report of the committee to which the petition 


of some Elders, who entertain conscientious 
scruples on the subject of holding slaves, to¬ 
gether with that of the Synod of Ohio, con¬ 
cerning the buying and selling of slaves, had 
been referred, reported, and their report being 
read and amended, is as follows, viz: 

“The General Assembly have repeatedly de¬ 
clared their cordial approbation of these prin- 
riples of civil liberty which appear to be 
recognized by the Federal and State govern¬ 
ments in these United States. They have ex¬ 
pressed their regret that the slavery of the 
Africans, and of their descendants, still contin¬ 
ues in so many places, and even among those 
within the pale of the Church, and have 
urged the Presbyteries under their care to 
adopt such measures as will secure at least to 
the rising generation of slaves, within the 
bounds of the Church, a religious education, 
that they may be prepared for the exercise and 
enjoyment of liberty, when God in his provi¬ 
dence may open a door for their emancipa¬ 
tion. The committee refer said petitioners to 
the printed extracts of the Synod of New 
York and Philadelphia, for the year 1787, on 
this subject, republished by the Assembly in 
1793, and also to the extracts of the Minutes 
of the Assembly for 1795, which last are in 
the following words, viz: [See above.] 

“This is deemed a sufficient answer to the 
first petition, and with regard to the second, 
the Assembly observe that, although in some 
sections of our country, under certain circum¬ 
stances, the transfer of slaves may be una¬ 
voidable, yet they consider the buying and 
selling of slaves by way of traffic, and all un¬ 
due severity in the management of them, as 
inconsistent with the spirit of the gospel. And 
they recommend it to the Presbyteries and 
Sessions under their care, to make use of all 
prudent measures to prevent such shameful 
and unrighteous conduct.”— Minutes , 1815, p. 
585. 

4. Next is the act of 1818. This is the 
most complete deliverance the Assembly has 
ever made on slavery, as to its moral aspect. 
Such a record has probably never been made 
by any other church in America. 

(a) The following resolution was submitted 
to the Assembly, viz : 

“Resolved , Tnat a person who shall sell as a 
slave, a member of the church, who shall be at 
the time in good standing in the church and 
unwilling to be sold, acts inconsistently with 
the spirit of Christianity, and ought to be de¬ 
barred from the communion of the church.” 

After considerable discussion, the subject 
was committed to Dr. Green, Dr. Baxter, and 
Mr. Burgess, to prepare a report to be adopted 
by the Assembly, embracing the object of the 
above resolution, and also expressing the 
opinion of the Assembly in general as to 
slavery.— Minutes , 1818, p. 688. 

[The report of the committee was unani¬ 
mously adopted, and is as follows, Yiz:] 


28 


“The General Assembly of the Presbyterian 
Church, having taken into consideration the 
subject of slavery, think proper to make 
known their sentiments upon it to the 
churches and people under their care. 

(6) “We consider the voluntary enslaving 
of one portion of the human race by another, 
as a gross violation of the most precious and 
sacred rights of human nature; as utterly in¬ 
consistent with the law of God, which re¬ 
quires us to love our neighbor as ourselves, 
and as totally irreconcilable with the spirit and 
principles of the gospel of Christ, which enjoin 
that ‘all things whatsoever ye would that 
men should do to you, do ye even so to them.’ 
Slavery creates a paradox in the moral sys¬ 
tem; it. exhibits rational, accountable, and im¬ 
mortal beings in such circumstances as scarce¬ 
ly to leave them the power of moral action. 
It exhibits them as dependent on the will of 
others, whether they shall receive religous in¬ 
struction; whether they shall know and worship 
the true God ; whether they shall enjoy the 
ordinances of the gospel; whether they shall 
perform the duties and cherish the endear¬ 
ments of husbands and wives, parents and 
children, neighbors and friends; whether they 
shall preserve their chastity and purity, or 
regard the dictates of justice and humanity. 
Such are some of the consequences of slavery 
—consequences not imaginary, but which 
connect themselves with its very existence. 
The evils to which the slave is always ex¬ 
posed often take place in fact, and in their 
very worst degree and form; and where all of 
them do not take place, as we l'ejoice to say in 
many instances, through the influence of the 
principles of humanity and religion on the 
mind of masters, they do not—still the slave 
is deprived of his natural right, degraded as a 
human being, and exposed to the danger of 
passing into ihe hands of a master who may 
inflict upon him all the hardships and injuries 
which inhumanity and avarice may suggest. 

“From this view of the consequences re¬ 
sulting from the practice into which Chr'stian 
people have most inconsistently fallen, of en¬ 
slaving a portion of their brethren of man¬ 
kind—for ‘God hath made of one blood all na¬ 
tions of men to dwell on the face of the earth,’ 
—it is manifestly the duty of all Christians 
who enjoy the light of the present day, when 
the inconsistency of slavery, both with the 
dictates of humanity and religion, has been 
demonstrated, and is generally seen and ac¬ 
knowledged, to use their honest, earnest, and 
unwearied endeavors, to correct the errors of 
former times, and as speedily as possible to 
efface this blot on our holy religion, and to 
obtain the complete abolition of slavery 
throughout Christendom, and if possible 
throughout the world. 

(c) “We rejoice that the Church to which we 
belong commenced as early as any other in 
this country, the good work of endeavoring to 
put an end to slavery, and that in the same 
work many of its members have ever since 


been, and now are, among the most active, 
vigorous, and efficient laborers. We do. in¬ 
deed, tenderly sympathise with those portions 
of our Church and our country where the 
evil of slavery has been entailed upon them; 
where a great, and the most virtuous part of 
the community abhor slavery, and wish its 
extermination as sincerely as any others— 
but where the number of slaves, their ignor¬ 
ance, and their vicious habits generally, ren¬ 
der an immediate and universal emancipation 
inconsistent alike with the safety and happi¬ 
ness of the master and the slave. With those 
who are thus circumstanced, we repeat that 
we tenderly sympathise. At the same time, 
we earnestly exhort them to continue, and if 
possible, to increase their exertions to effect a 
total abolition of slavery. We exhort them 
to suffer no greater delay to take place in this 
most interesting concern, than a regard to the 
public welfare truly and indispensably de¬ 
mands. 

(d) “As our country has inflicted a most 
grievous injury upon the unhappy Africans, 
by bringing them into slavery, we cannot in¬ 
deed urge that we should add a second injury 
to the first, by emancipating them in such 
manner as they will be likely to destroy them¬ 
selves or others. But we do think that our 
country ought to be governed in this 
matter by no other consideration than 
an honest and an impartial regard 
to the happiness of the injured party, un¬ 
influenced by the expense or inconvenience 
which such a regard may involve. We, there¬ 
fore, warn a'l who belong to our denomina¬ 
tion of Christians, against unduly extending 
this plea of necessity,; against making it a 
cover for the love and practice of slavery, or 
a pretense for not using efforts that are lawful 
and practicable, to extinguish this evil. 

“And we, at the same time, exhort others to 
forbear harsh censures, and uncharitable re¬ 
flections on their brethren, who unhappily live 
among slaves whom they cannot immediately 
set free; but who, at the same time, are real¬ 
ly using all their influence, and all their en¬ 
deavors, to bring them into a state of freedom, 
as soon as a door for it can be safely opened. 

“Having thus expressed our views of slave¬ 
ry, and of the duty indispensably incumbent 
on all Christians to labor for its complete ex¬ 
tinction, we proceed to recommend, and we 
do it with all the earnestness and solemnity 
which this momentous subject demands, a 
particular attention to the following points: 

(e) “We recommend to all our people to 
patronize and encourage the Society lately 
formed, for colonizing in Africa, the land of 
their ancestors, the free people of color in our 
country. We hope that much good may result 
from the plans and efforts of this Society. 
And while we exceedingly rejoice to have 
witnessed its origin and organization among 
the holders of slaves, as giving an unequivo¬ 
cal pledge of their desires to deliver them¬ 
selves and their country from the calamity of 


29 


slavery; we hope that those portions of the 
American Union, Whose inhabitants arc by a 
gracious providence more favorably circum¬ 
stanced, will cordially, and liberally, and 
earnestly co-operate with their brethren, in 
bringing about the great end contemplated. 

(/) “We recommend to all the members of 
our religious denomination, not only to per¬ 
mit, but to facilitate and encourage the in¬ 
struction of their slaves in the principles and 
duties of the Christian religion; by granting 
them liberty to attend on the preaching of the 
gospel, when they have opportunity; by favor¬ 
ing the instruction of them in the Sabbath 
School, wherever those schools can be formed; 
and by giving them all other proper advantages 
for acquiring the knowledge of their duty, both 
to God and to man. We are perfectly satisfied 
that it is incumbent, on all Christians to com¬ 
municate religious instruction to those who 
are under their authority, so that the doing of 
this in the case before us, so far from operat¬ 
ing, as some have apprehended it might, as an 
incitement to insubordination and insurrec¬ 
tion, w nuId, on the contrary, operate as the 
most powerful means for the prevention of 
those evils. 

(y) ‘‘We enjoin it on all Church Sessions 
and Presbyteries, under the care of this As¬ 
sembly, to discountenance, and as far as pos¬ 
sible to prevent, all cruelty of whatever kind 
in the treatment of slaves: especially the 
cruelty of separating husband and wife, pa¬ 
rents and children, and that which consists in 
selling slaves to those who will either them¬ 
selves deprive these unhappy people of the 
blessings of the gospel, or who will transport 
them to places where the gospel is not pro¬ 
claimed, or where it is forbidden to slaves to 
attend upon its institutions. And if it shall 
ever happen that a Christian professor in our 
oommnnion shall sell a slave who is also in 
communion and good standing with our 
Church, contrary to his or her will and inclin¬ 
ation, it ought immediately to claim the par¬ 
ticular attention of the proper Church judica¬ 
ture; aud unless there be such peculiar cir¬ 
cumstances attending the case as can but sel¬ 
dom happen, it ought to be followed, without 
delay, by a suspension of the offender from all 
the privileges of the Church till he repent, 
and make all the reparation in his power to 
the injured party.”— Minutes, 1818, p. 692. 

Farther action declined in 1836. 

Inasmuch as the Constitution of the Pres¬ 
byterian Church, in its preliminary and fund¬ 
amental principles, declares that no Church 
judicatory ought to pretend to make laws to 
bind the conscience, in virtue of their own au¬ 
thority : and as the urgency of the business of 
the Assembly, and the shortness of the time 
during which they can continue in session, 
render it impossible to deliberate and decide 
judiciously on the subject of slavery in its 
relations to the Church ; therefore, resolved, 
that this whole subject be indefinitely post¬ 


poned.— Minute*, 1836, pp, 247, 218, 272, 273. 

On communion with slaveholders. The 
following is the act of 1845. It has refer¬ 
ence to that aspect of the subject treated of 
iu 1795, in the letter to Transylvania Pres¬ 
bytery : 

The committtee to whom were referred the 
memorials on the subject of slavery, beg leave 
to submit the following report: 

( а) “The memorialists may be divided into 
three classes, viz: 

“ 1. Those which represent the system of 
slavery, as it exists in these United States, as 
a great evil, and pray this General Assembly 
to adopt measures for the amelioration of the 
condition of the slaves. 

“2. Those which ask the Assembly <0 re¬ 
ceive memorials on the subject of slavery, to 
allow a full discussion of it, and to enjoin 
upon the members of our Church, residing in 
States whose laws forbid the slaves being 
taught to r> ad, to seek by nil lawful means the 
repeal of those laws. 

“3. Those which represent slavery as a moral 
evil, a heinous sin in the sight of God, calcu¬ 
lated to bring upon the Church the curse of 
God, and calling for the exercise of discipline 
in the case of those who persist in maintain¬ 
ing or justifying the relation of master to 
slaves. 

(б) “The question which is now unhappily 
agitating and dividing other branches of the 
Church, and which is pressed upon the atten¬ 
tion of the Assembly by one of the three 
classes of memorialists just named, is, wheth¬ 
er the holding of slaves is, under all circum¬ 
stances, a heinous sin, calling for the disci¬ 
pline of the Church. 

(c) “The Church of Christ is a spiritual 
body, whose jurisdiction extends to the religi¬ 
ous faith and moral conduct of her members. 
She cannot legislate, where Christ has not 
legislated, nor make terms of membership 
which he has not made. The question, there¬ 
fore, which this Assembly is called to decide, 
is this: Do the Scriptures teach that the hold¬ 
ing of slaves, without regard to circumstances, 
is a sin, the renunciation of which should be 
made a condition of membership in the Church 
of Christ? 

(d) “It is imposs’'ble to answer this question 
in the affirmative, without contradicting some 
of the plainest declarations of the word of 
God. That slavery existed in the days of 
Christ and his apostles is an admitted fact. 
That they did not denounce the relation itself 
as sinful, as inconsistent with Christianity j 
that slaveholders were admitted to member¬ 
ship in the churches organized by the apostles; 
that whilst they were required to treat their 
slaves with kindness, and as rational, account¬ 
able, immortal beings, and, if Christians, as 
brethren in the Lord, they were not command¬ 
ed to emancipate them ; that slaves were re¬ 
quired to be ‘obedient to their masters accord- 


30 


ir.g to the flesh, with fear and trembling, with 
singleness of heart as unto Christ/ are facts 
which meet the eye of every reader of the 
New Testament. This Assembly cannot, 
therefore, denounce the holding of slaves as 
necessarily a heinous and scandalous sin, cal¬ 
culated to bring upon the Church the curse of 
God, without charging the apostles of Christ 
with conniving at sin, introducing into the 
Church such sinners, and thus bringing upon 
them the curse of the Almighty. 

(e) “In so saying, however, the Assembly 
are not to be understood as denying that there 
is evil connected with slavery. Much less do 
they approve those defective and oppressive 
laws by which, in some of the States, it is reg¬ 
ulated. Nor would they by any means coun¬ 
tenance the traffic in slaves for the sake of 
gain; the separation of husbands and wives, 
parents and children, for the sake of ‘filthy 
lucre/ or for the convenience of the master; 
or cruel treatment of slaves, in any respect. 
Every Christian and philanthropist certainly 
should seek by all peaceable and lawful means, 
the repeal of unjust and oppressive laws, and 
the amendment of such as are defective, so as 
to protest the slaves from cruel treatment by 
wicked men, and secure to them the right to 
receive religious instruction. 

(/) “Nor is the Assembly to be understood 
as countenancing the idea that masters may 
regard their servants as mere property, and 
not as human beings, rational, accountable, 
immortal. The Scriptures prescribe not only 
the duties of servants, but of masters also, 
warning the latter to discharge those duties, 
‘knowing that their Master is in heaven, 
neither is there respect of persons with 
Him.’ 

( g) “The Assembly intend simply to say, 
that since Christ and his inspired apostles did 
not make the holding of slaves a bar to com- 
muniou, we, as a court of Christ, have no au¬ 
thority to do so; since they did not attempt to 
remove it from the Church by legislation, we 
have no authority to legislate on the subject. 
We feel constrained further to say, that how¬ 
ever desirable it may be to ameliorate the 
condition of the slaves in the Southern and 
Western States, or to remove slavery from our 
country, these objects, we are fully persuaded, 
can never be secured by ecclesiastical legisla¬ 
tion. Much less can they be attained by 
those indiscriminate denunciations against 
slaveholders, without regard to their charac¬ 
ter or circumstances, which have to so great 
an extent characterized the movements of 
modern abolitionists, which so far from re¬ 
moving the evils complained of, tend only to 
perpetuate and aggravate them. 

“The apostles of Christ sought to ameliorate 
the condition of slaves, not by denouncing 
and excommunicating their masters, but by 
teaching both masters and slaves the glorious 
doctrines of the gospel, and enjoining upon 
each the discharge of their relative duties. 
Thus only cau the Church of Christ, as such, 


now improve the condition of the slaves in 
our country. 

(A) “As to the extent of the evils involved 
in slavery, and the best methods of removing 
them, various opinions prevail, and neither 
the Scriptures nor our constitution authorize 
this body to prescribe any particular course 
to be pursued by the churches under our care. 
The Assembly cannot but rejoice, however, to 
learn that the ministers and churches in the 
slaveholding States are awaking to a deeper 
sense of their obligation to extend to the 
slave population generally the means of grace, 
and many slaveholders not professedly re¬ 
ligious favor this object. We earnestly exhort 
them to abound more and more in this good 
work. We would exhort every believing mas¬ 
ter to remember that his Master is also in 
heaven, and in view of all the circumstances 
in which he is placed, to act in the spirit of 
the golden rule; ‘Whatsoever ye would that 
men should do to you, do ye even so to them.’ 

‘ In view of the above stated principles and 
facts, 

Resolved , 1. That the General Assembly of 
the Presbyterian Church in the United States 
was originally organized, and has since con¬ 
tinued the bond of union in the Church, upon 
the conceded principle that the existence of 
domestic slavery, under the circumstances in 
which it is found in the southern portion of 
the country, is no bar to Christian com¬ 
munion. 

‘•2. That the petitions that ask the Assembly 
to make the holding of slaves in it 3 elf a mat¬ 
ter of discipline, do virtually require this ju¬ 
dicatory to dissolve itself, and abandon the or¬ 
ganization, under which, by the Divine bless¬ 
ing, it has so long prospered. The tendency 
is evidently to separate the northern from the 
southern portion of the Church; a result 
which every good citizen must deplore, as 
tending to the dissolution of the Union of our 
beloved country, and which every enlightened 
Christian will oppose as bringing about a 
ruinous and unnecessary schism between 
brethren who maintain a common faith.” 

The yeas and nays being ordered, were re¬ 
corded. [Yeas 1G8, nays 13, excused 4.]— 
Minutes, 1845, pp. 1G, 18. 

No change of sentiment. In 1846 the fol¬ 
lowing minute was adopted: 

“Our church has from time to time, during 
a period of nearly sixty years, expressed its 
views on the subject of slavery. During all 
this period it has held and uttered substantial¬ 
ly the same sentiments. .Believing that this 
uniform testimony is true, and capable of vin¬ 
dication from the word of God, the Assembly 
is at the same time clearly of the opinion that 
it has already deliberately and solemnly 
spoken on this subject with sufficient fullness 
and clearness—therefore, 

Resolved, That no further action upon this 
subject is at present needed. 

This fpiqute was adopted by a vote 119 tq 


S3, ihe yeas and nays being recorded. 

The following resolution was then offered by 
the Rev. R. M. White, and was adopted, [with¬ 
out division:] 

“Resolved , That, in the judgment of this 
House, the action of the General Assembly of 
1845 was not intended to deny or rescind the 
the testimony often uttered by the General 
Assemblies previous to that date.”— Minutes , 
1846, pp. 206, 207. 

8. Educating and licensing black men to 
preach. 

\ 34. A Negro Missionary appointed. 

1801, p. 229, Resolved, That in older to at¬ 
tain one important object of the contribu¬ 
tions, (the instruction of the blacks, See Book 
V. $$ 1, 290, 291,) Mr. John Chavis, a black 
man of prudence and piety, who has been ed¬ 
ucated and licensed to preach by the Presby¬ 
tery of Lexington, in Virginia, bo employed 
as a Missionary among people of his own 
color, until the meeting of next General As¬ 
sembly. And that for his better direction in 
the discharge of duties, which are attended 
with m <ny circumstances of delicacy and diffi¬ 
culty, some prudential instructions be issued 
to him by the Assembly, governing himself by 
which, the knowledge of religion among that 
people may be made more and more to 
strengthen the order of society. And the 
Rev. Messrs. Hoge, Alexander, Logan, and 
Stephenson, were appointed a committee to 
draught instructions to said Chavis, and pre¬ 
scribe his route. 

[The bjack Missionary thus commissioned, 
continued in the service several years.] 

§ 35. Licensure of John Gloucester. 

1807, p. 381. A communication from the 
Presbytery of Union was handed into the As¬ 
sembly by the Committee of Overtures, re¬ 
questing advice in relation to the licensure of 
John Gloucester, a black man; and Messrs. 
Clark, Miller, and Samuel Brown, were ap¬ 
pointed a committee to take the same into 
consideration, and report as soon as con¬ 
venient. 

p. 387. [The report of the committee was 
adopted, as follows:] 

Whereas, From the communications from 
the Presbytery of Union, it appears that the 
said John Gloucester has been for some time 
under the care of the Presbytery of Union; 
that, in the opinion of that Presbytery, he 
possesses promising talents and eminent piety; 
that he has been, for several years, engaged 
in the study of literature and theology, but 
has not yet obtained all the literary qualifica¬ 
tions usually required in candidates for li¬ 
censure; and that, if he were licensed, there 
is much reason to believe he might be highly 
useful in preaching the gospel among those of 
his own color; and whereas, said Presbytery 
requests the advice of the General Assembly, 
therefore, 


Resolved , 1 . That the General Assembly 
highly approve the caution and prudence of 
the Presbytery of Union in this case. 

2. That, considering the circumstances of 
this particular case, viz: the evidence of un¬ 
usual talents, discretion, and piety, possessed 
by John Gloucester; the good reason there is 
to believe that he may be highly useful in 
preaching the gospel among those of his own 
color; and the various difficulties likely to at¬ 
tend a farther delay in proceeding in this 
case, the General Assembly did, and hereby 
do authorize the Presbytery of Philadelphia 
to consider the case of John Gloucester; and, 
if they think proper, to license him to preach 
the gospel. 

[Mr. Gloucester was a member of the Assem¬ 
bly, from the Presbytery of Philadelphia, in 
1817.]— Minutes , 1816, p. 658. 


Action at various periods, of the Presbyteries 
and Synod of Kentucky on Slavery. 

Having given at length the deliverances of 
our highest Judicatory on slavery we deem it 
not improper to add here the recorded acts 
and utterances of the Synod of Kentucky, to¬ 
gether with the two oldest Presbyteries of 
Synod on this subject. We do this first, be¬ 
cause the Synod of Kentucky is one among the 
oldest in the Church: having been formed in 
1802, only thirteen years after the division of 
the original Synod and formation of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly. It has also been distinguish¬ 
ed in having a ministry of marked ability. 
Secondly, the Synod, located in a Slave State, 
has probably a larger record, running through 
a longer period of years, than any other Synod 
in the Church. Lastly, and chiefly, for the 
reason that the ministers and people of this 
Synod who adhere to the Assembly in these 
times of calumny and schism, have been 
charged with deserting the principles of their 
Presbyterian fathers of Kentucky, in regard 
to slavery. It is charged that the funds of 
Centre College and Danville Theological Sem- 
Seminary are prostituted —that is, used by 
anti-slavery fanatics &c., &c. 

The Declaration and Testimony says : the 
institution of slavery has “always existed un¬ 
condemned by the Church;” That it was 
“sanctioned by Christ and his apostles” Dr. 
Stuart Robinson says, (see Free Christian 
Commonwealth of March 7th.) that Christ 
aquiesced in its ethical propriety.” And again 



32 


in his paper of 21st. asserts that the old Sy¬ 
nod of Kentucky held the same views of slave¬ 
ry as those now held by the Declaration and 
Testimony ! I 

The Presbyterians of Kentucky, adhering 
with the Assembly, are denounced as radicals, 
abolitionists, semi-infidels, and what not, base¬ 
ly deserting the principles of our fathers. 
Now let the reader peruse there records, re 
vealing clearly as they do the mind of our 
Church in Kentucky on slavery—and then 
judge between us and our accusers. Follow¬ 
ing the chronological order, we present first 
the records of the Presbytery of Transylva¬ 
nia, then the Presbytery of west Lexington; 
lastly of the Synod of Kentucky. It is proper 
to state that the following extracts from the 
records of Transylvania Presbytery and the 
Synod were copied from the manuscript re¬ 
cords of those bodies, and have been carefully 
compared and certified by the stated clerk. 
Rev. S. S. McRoberts. The extracts from 
the records of West Lexington Presbytery 
were originally contributed to the Presbyterian 
and are certified by the stated clerk of that 
Presbytery. 

Presbytei'y of Transylvania. 

(1794.) 

Paint Lick, Oct. 13th, (Robert Marshall, 
Moderator.) 

Ordered. That all persons under the care 
of this Presbytery, holding slaves, shall teach 
every slave not above the age of fifteen years, 
to read the word of God and give them such 
good education as may prepare them for the 
enjoyment of freedom, and shall interest such 
slaves of the above description, and all others 
under their care, as far as they can find it 
practicable in the principles and precepts of 
the Christian religion, and that the masters of 
such slaves shall by every rational means in 
their power, urge their attendance on public 
and family worship, and shall make a return 
of all their slaves under the above age to the 
Church session under whose care such mas¬ 
ters may be. Minutes, voL 1 p p 147-8. 
(1795.) 

Ash Ridge Church, Feby. 17th. (Mr. Shan¬ 
non Moderator. 


A paper containing certain queries on the 
subject of slavery was presented to Presbyte¬ 
ry and read. On motion, Resolved to consi¬ 
der the purport of said queries. 

On motion, Resolved to refer the consider¬ 
ation of said queries to next General Assem¬ 
bly, by the hands of the commissioners. 

On motion, Ordered that Mr. Rice and Mr. 
Crawford be a Committee to state in as clear 
manner as possible the aforesaid queries, to 
be laid before the next General Asssembly. 
vol. 1, p p 168 9. 

(1796.) 

(David Rice, Moderator.) 

A remonstrance against slavery, with pro¬ 
posals for emancipating of slaves, Ac., was 
presented and read; also a letter Ac., from 
Bourbon county, signed James Smith, to the 
same effect: ordered that the consideration of 
the same be posponed till to-morrow. 

April 15th. The remonstrance against sla¬ 
very was taken up, when Presbytery, after 
mature deliberation, came to the following 
resolution, (viz.) That although Presbytery 
are fully convinced of the great evil of slave¬ 
ry, yet they view the final remedy as alone be¬ 
longing to the civil power; and also do not 
think that thay have sufficient authority from 
the word of God to make it a term of Church 
communion; they therefore leave it to the 
consciences of the brethren to act as they may 
think it proper, earnestly recommending, to 
the people under their care, to emancipate 
such of their slaves as they may think fit sub¬ 
jects of liberty; and that they also take every 
possible measure, by teaching their young 
slaves to read, also giving them such other in¬ 
structions as may be in their power, to prepare 
them for the enjoyment of liberty, an event 
which they contemplate with the greatest 
pleasure, and which they hope will be ac¬ 
complished as soon as the nature of things 
will admit Minutes vol 2* p 101. 

(1797.) 

Bethel Church Oct 4th, The question was 
put whether Presbytery should take under 
consideration the subject of slavery agreeable 
to a petition presented for that purpose—the 
question was carried in the affirmative. 


33 


Oct. 5th, Upon motion the question was 
taken up. Is slavery amoral evil? It was 
determined in the affirmative. 

The question was likewise considered. Are 
all persons who hold slaves guilty of a moral 
evil; and was voted in the negative. 

A third question was proposed, as follows : 
Who are not guilty of moral evil in holding 
slaves ? Resolved that the question now be¬ 
fore Presbytery, is of so much importance 
that the consideration of it be put off till a fu¬ 
ture day. Minutes , vol. 2 p p 161-3. 

Resolved to refer the consideration of said 
queries to the next General Assembly, by 
the hands of the commissioners. 

On motion, Ordered that Mr. Rice and Mr. 
Crawford be a committee to state in as clear 
a manner as possible the aforesaid queries 
to be laid before the General Assembly, p p 
168-9. 

Lancaster Oct. 9th 1829, Daniel Nelson Mod. 

Minutes vol. 5, page 100. 

On motion, Resolved that the members of 
this Presbytery be directed to read from their 
respective pulpits, the following paragraphs 
in the Assembly’s Digest, on the subject of 
slavery, (viz.) Part 4, chap. 2. Sects. 4, 5, 6. 
also part 13, chap. 1, Sects. 2, 3 4; and that 
they exhort their respective charges in the 
spirit of love on the subject 

And be it further Resolved, that the sessions 
under the care of this Presbytery be directed 
to take immediate measures to carry into 
effect the spirit of the above sections. 
Springfield , April 5, 1830. James Burch , Moder¬ 
ator, vol 5. page 100. 

The members of Presbytery were called on 
to state whether they had complied with the 
resolution of the last Presbytery directing 
them to read certain portions of the Assem¬ 
bly’s Digest from their pulpits’ on the subject 
of slavery : and it appearing that but few of the 
members had complied, 

On motion, Resolved, that the resolution be 
continued until the next meeting. 

Harrodsburg, April ls£ 1836. J. O. Barnes , 
Moderator Minutes vol 6 page 42. 

A committee appointed by the Synod of 
1834, according to the injunction of that bo¬ 
dy, reported a plan for the moral and religious 


instruction and future emancipation of slaves, 
which report was received and made the or¬ 
der of the day for to-morrow morning. 

April 2nd p p 49-53 

Presbytery proceeded to the order of the 
day, (viz.) The consideration of the report of 
the Synodical Committee. The committee of 
Synod on the subject of slavery laid before 
Presbytery the following plan for the moral 
and religious instruction and future emanci¬ 
pation of slaves, (viz. 1.) We would recom¬ 
mend that all slaves now under 20 years of 
age, and all those yet to be born in our pos¬ 
session, be emancipated as they severally 
REACH THEIR 25th YEAR. 

(2.) We recommend that deeds of emanci¬ 
pation be now drawn up and recorded in our 
respective county courts, specifying the slaves 
whom we are about to emancipate and the 
age at which each is to become free. This 
measure is highly necessary, as it will furnish 
to our own minds, to the world, and to our 
slaves, satisfactory proof of our sincerity in 
this work; and it will also secure the liberty 
of the slave against all contingencies. 

(3.) We recommend that our slaves, be in¬ 
structed in the common elementary branches 
of education. 

(4.) We recommend that strenuous and 
persevering efforts be made, to induce them 
to attend regularly upon the ordinary services 
of religion, both domestic and public. 

(5.) We recommend that great pains be 
taken to teach them the holy scriptures, and 
that to effect this, the instrumentality of Sab¬ 
bath Schools when ever they can be enjoyed, 
be united with thafe^f domestic instruction. 

A resolution was then offered that Presby¬ 
ters recommend to the churches under their 
care to adopt the plan presented by th^com- 
mittee of Synod. On this question yeas and 
nays being called for, the vote was taken and 
stood as follows: 

Yeas. Howe, Robertson, Barnes, Young, 
Lynn, Root, Green, Landram, Hogland : 9 

Nays. Thompson, Penick, Wade, 3. 

N. L. Cleland, Rose, Ray Holsclaw, Hays, 
Cebell: 6. 

Resolved , that each minister of this Presby¬ 
ter in the congregation to which he preaches, 
and each session of the vacant congregation j| 




34 


be required to read before the Church, the 
report of the Synodical Committee of 1834, 
containing the plan of instruction and eman¬ 
cipation of slaves recommended by the Pres¬ 
bytery at least once a year. 

Synod met in Danville , Wednesday Oct. 8th 1834 
Vol 5th, page 46. 

John Green presented a document on the 
subject of slavery , which was made the order 
of the day for this afternoon. 

Page 48, The order of the day, viz : 

The subject of slavery as proposed by Bro¬ 
ther Green, was taken up and the document 
considered by paragraphs. After the discus¬ 
sion had been continued some time, the whole 
subject was committed to a special committee 
consisting of J. K. Burch, Young, Breckin 
ridge (W. L.) (Elders,) Stone^treet and Green. 

* * * * 

The committee on slayery submitted their 
report which was accepted ; and on motion, 
Synod proceeded to the consideration of the 
first paragarph. * * * 

After recess, the discussion of the docu¬ 
ment on slavery was resumed * * * 

* The unfinished business was resumed, and 
several paragraphs of the document on slave¬ 
ry were separately adopted. A resolution to 
adopt the whole was offered, which the Mod¬ 
erator declared nut of order, inasmuch as 
no amendment had been offered. An appeal 
being taken from the decision of the chair 
was sustained. Brother Howard then pro¬ 
posed an amendment, which being itself amen¬ 
ded, was adopted, 'and committed with the 
previous document. The question on the adop¬ 
tion of the whole document as amended, was 
arrested by a motion to adjourn until 9 o’clock 
to-morrow morning. Closed with prayer. 
Saturday October 11th 1834 : 

The unfinished business was resumed, be¬ 
ing the final adoption of the whole document 
on slavery. After some discussion the pre¬ 
vious question was called for and the call was 
sustained. The vote was then taken by the 
call of the roll, and the document was adop¬ 
ted, and is as follows viz: 

Declaration and Resolutions of the Synod of 
KentucJcg concerning Slavery. 

This Synod believing that the system of 


absolute and hereditary domestic slavery, as 
it exists among the members of our commun¬ 
ion is repugnant to the principles of our holy 
religion, as revealed in the Sacred Scriptures, 
and that tho continuance of the system, any 
longer than is necessary to prepare for its 
safe and beneficial termination is sinful, feel 
it their duty earnestly to recommend to 
all Presbyteries, Church sessions, and people, 
under their care, to commence immediate 
preparation for the termination of slavery 
among us :—so that this evil may cease to ex¬ 
ist with the present generation; and the future 
offspring of our slaves be free. 

In recommending that emancipation be 
universally extended to all slaves hereafter 
born, this Synod would’ not be understood as 
excluding thse now living from the operation 
of. tbe benevolent principle above recommen¬ 
ded. They believe there may be at the present 
time many slaves belonging tb members of 
the Presbyterian communion, whose situa¬ 
tions would be greatly improved by emanci¬ 
pation ; and that many others, especially of 
the children and youth might be prepared for 
freedom by the use of efforts on the part of their 
masters. But it is difficult to provide by gen¬ 
eral rules for such individual cases, and this 
Synod think it best to leave them to the oper¬ 
ation of the Christian law of love on the con¬ 
sciences of men. 

For the purpose of promoting harmony and 
concert of action on this important subject. 
The Synod do 

Resolve , That a committee of ten be ap¬ 
pointed, to consist of an equal number of 
ministers and elders, John Brown, chair¬ 
man, John Green, Thomas Porter Smith, 
Charles N. Cunningham, John R. Alexander, 
Robert Stuart, J. K. Burch, Nathan H. Hall, 
John C. Young, and Wm. L. Breckinridge, 
whose duty it shall be to digest and prepare 
a plan for the moral and religious instruction 
of our slaves, and for their future emancipa¬ 
tion ; and to report such plan to the several 
Presbyteries within the bounds of this Synod, 
for their consideration and approval. 

Resolved further , That this Synod have 
unabated confidence in the scheme of African 
colonization and hope of its great usefulness 








35 


and that we look upon African colonization 
as one interesting door of hope opened to us 
in the Providence of God, for doing a signal 
service of patriotism to our common country, 
an act of justice to the unfortunate African 
race among us, and for spreading the bless¬ 
ings of civilization and the everlasting gospel 
in the interior of Africa.” 

The yeas and nays were called for,and being 
recorded are as follows; viz. 

Teas : J Howe, S B Robertson, J K Burch, 
J C Barnes, Wm Dickson, J H Brown, J C 
Young, Wm L Breckinridge, Tim Root, Pe¬ 
ter Vanarsdale, J Green, Alex Reed, Louis 
Landram, Hugh Hays, Jno Askins, Abner 
Hamilton, John Calhoon, Charles M Cun¬ 
ningham, Charles A Campbell, J S Simrall, 
W W Hall, J F Price, Robert Davidson, 
Samuel Wilson, Robert Stuart, L W Dunlap, 
J N Blackburn, ATS Killman, J H Logan, 
John Brown, W B Reed, Asa Farrar, J S 
Berryman, D B Price, J L Tracy, J Mclrwin, 
A A Shannon, Jas Hawthorne, N L Rice, 
Alfred Hamilton, M Hardin, Alex. Logan, C 
Nourse, M D Noeril, S W Calvert, R H Lilly, 
Eli Smith, D S Todd, J J Rice, Thomas Cole, 
S Y Garrison, C Philips, George Poague, T P 
Smith, Andrew Todd, Joseph Huber :— 56 
Nays , Wm Wade, Thos C Howard, James 
Bell, J Herriott, Sami Wallace, A Cameron, 
Thomas Smith, James Caldwell:— 8 

Non Liquet :—Thomas Cleland, Samuel 
Lynn, N A Thompson, S Y Marshall, J Eg- 
gen, J Bemyss, Robt Hamilton :— 7. 

On motion it was Resolved, that the whole 
document as amended, be published in the 
Western Luminary, and that it be recom¬ 
mended to each pastor and stated supply to 
read the same to the congregations in which 
he labors, previously to the next meeting of 
Synod. 

Bowling Grebn Oct. 17th 1835. 
The committee appointed last year to pre¬ 
pare a plan for religious instruction and fu¬ 
ture emancipation of slaves, to be laid before 
our Presbyteries ; reported that they had per¬ 
formed that duty in part p 71 vol 5. 

It was Resolved, That we cordially and 
earnestly recommend the American Coloni¬ 
zation Society to the affections and patronage 
of our Church, p. <4, do. 


Bardstown, Oct 1836. 
The committee on Gurley’s letter (Agt* of 
Col. Soc.) reported the following resolutions, 
viz. 

Resolved , That this Synod highly approve 
of the plan and objects of Am. Colonization 
Society , and earnestly recommend the same 
to the liberal patronage of the Christian com¬ 
munity. 

Resolved , That it be recommended to all 
the churches under our care to take up annu¬ 
al collections in aid of said Society on or near 
the 4th of July. p. 86-7 vol 5. 

Synod—Lexington Sept, 1803. 
The Committee of overtures report that the 
following questions having been laid before 
them (viz.) Should not the Synod require 
their members to attend with punctuality to 
the business of catechising their people, and 
to be particularly careful that the black peo¬ 
ple in their congregations participate in those 
instructions:— 

The committee thought it proper to overture, 
and lay it before Synod, p p, 31-2 vol 1. 

The allowing case having been laid before 
the committee of overtures (viz.) Should not 
the Synod require their members to attend 
with punctuality to the business of catechising 
their people and to be particularly careful 
that the black people in their congregations 
participate in their instructions. On motion 
Resolved that Synod require their members to 
perform the aforementioned duties, which was 
carried in the affirmative, vol 1, p p 39-40. 

From the Presbyterian, of July 23, 1864. 

A Documentary History of the Subject of Slav¬ 
ery as recorded by the Presbytery of West Lex¬ 
ington , Jrom its Organization , April 16lA, 
1799, to October 10*&„ 1809. 

Ashridge, October 4, 1799. 

On motion, Resolved , That Messrs. Marshall, 
Welsh, Blythe and Colonel Patterson be a 
committee to draft a circular letter, addressed 
to the churches under our care, which shall 
express the sense of Presbytery on the sub¬ 
ject of family religion, the observance of the 
Lord’s Day, dancing, and slavery, and make a 
report to the next stated session.— Records of 
West Lexington Presbytery , vol. 1, p. 13. 

Paris, [Ky.J April 9, 1800. 

It was resolved, at our la»t stated session, 
that Messrs. Marshall, Blythe, Welsh, an i 




36 


Colonel Patterson, be a committee to draft a 
letter, addressed to the churches under our 
care, expressing the sense of Presbytery on 
the subjects of family religion, the observance 
of the Lord’s Day, dancing, and slavery, and 
report at the present session. 

It was also resolved, that the same commit¬ 
tee write a letter to the Moderator of the 
Synod of Virginia, stating the difficulties of 
Presbytery, and many of the conscientious 
brethren in this quarter of the Church, re¬ 
specting slavery, which resolves have not 
been complied with. Presbytery, therefore, 
enjoin it upon the committee to comply with 
these resolves, and report to the Intermediate 
Presbytery in next May, to which session 
Presbytery agree to refer a memorial or peti¬ 
tion from the the united congregations of 
Cane Ridge and Coneord on the subject of 
slavery.—Vol. 1, pp. 21, 22. 

Bethel Church, May 22, 1800. 

Members present: R|v. Samuel Shannon, 
James Crawford, Robert Marshall, Jas. Welsh, 
William Robinson, Barton W. Stone, John 
Lyle, Elders Robert Maffit, John Adams, John 
Ralston, Anthony Logan, William Scott. Vol. 
1, p. 32. 

May 23, 1800.—Presbytery met according to 
adjournment. Constituted with prayer. Mem¬ 
bers present as above. Mr. Blythe is now 
present, and his reasons for absence on yes¬ 
terday are sustained. Col. Patterson also 
takes his seat. Vol. 1, p. 34. 

Ordered , That the memorial from the repre¬ 
sentatives of Cane Ridge and Concord, pre¬ 
sented at the last session of Presbytery, on 
the subject of slavery, be now taken up and 
•onsidered. 

Presbytery accordingly took up the memo¬ 
rial, and, having considered it, agreed to the 
following resolution: 

Resolved , That the memorial now before 
Presbytery from the representatives of Cane 
Ridge and Concord congregations, respecting 
the subject of slavery, be referred to the 
Synod of Virginia and the General Assembly, 
at their next sessions, accompanied with a 
letter on the same subject, stating the difficul¬ 
ties of Presbytery, and also of a number of 
members in the communion of the churches 
under its care; and that Messrs. Crawford, 
Marshall, Blythe, Welsh, and Stone, be a com¬ 
mittee for this purpose, and make report to 
next Presbytery. Vol 1, pp. 36, 37. 

Lexington, [Ky.] August 5, 1800. 

Presbytery met according to adjournment; 
was opened with a sermon by the Rev. James 
Blythe, from Isaiah lii, 8; constituted with 
prayer. Members present, viz: Robert Mar¬ 
shall, James Blythe, James Welsh, Barton W. 
Stone, ministers; Elders Samuel Walker, Jas. 
Foster. 

Presbytery adjourned to meet at the Uni¬ 
versity, to-morrow, 12 o’clock at noon. 


University in Lexington, Aug. 6, 1800. 

Members present as before, except Samuel 
Walker and Foster, Elders. * * * The 

committee now report that they have fulfilled 
their appointment, so far as relates to pre¬ 
paring a letter accompanying the memorial on 
the subject of slavery, to the Synod of Vir¬ 
ginia, which letter was read, and is as fol¬ 
lows, viz: 

Rev. Sir: W’e, the undersigned, a commit¬ 
tee of West Lexington Presbytery, by order of 
that Presbytery enclose to your reverend body 
a memorial from the congregations mentioned 
in s id memorial, on the subject of slavery—a 
subject likely to occasion much trouble and 
division in the churches in this country. You 
will see that the memorial submitted to your 
consideration states slavery as a moral evil, 
very heinous, and consequently sufficient to 
exclude such as will continue in the practice 
of it from the privileges of the Church. This, 
sir; is not the opinion of these congregations 
only, but also of a large majority of this Pres¬ 
bytery, and, we have reason to believe, of the 
sister Presbyteries in this country, as well as 
of the greater part of Christians in our com¬ 
munion. However, as we are instructed by 
the sacred oracles that all things should be 
done decently and in order, we have thought 
it not prudent that we should decide in a mat¬ 
ter of such moment, but that the higher judi¬ 
catories of the Church should direct us. We, 
therefore, submit it to your wisdom and seri¬ 
ous deliberation, and we earnestly request you 
to communicate to us your sentiments as short¬ 
ly after the rising of Synod as you may find 
convenient, as we think the state of the 
Churches here really requires it. 

We are, dear sir, your brethren in the‘gos¬ 
pel, James Crawford, 

Robert Marshall, 
Barton W. Stone, 
James Welsh, 

James Blythe, 

Presbytery agree to sustain the report, and 
order that the stated Clerk, forward the min¬ 
ute and letter to Synod. 

Presbytery adjourned. Concluded with 
prayer. Vol. 1, pp. 40, 44. 

Wednesday , Oct. 13, 1802—Stoner Month.— 
Presbytery met according to adjournment; 
members present as above. [Messrs. Joseph 
Howe, John Lyle, Barton W. Stone, Samuel 
Rannells, Isaac Tull, Ministers; Elders, 
Messrs. Hayden, Henry, Brown, Ardery.] 

Certain grievances being presented to Pres¬ 
bytery, arising from certain resolves entered 
into in two particular congregations, prohib¬ 
iting possessors of slaves, not acquiescing in 
said resolves, from communion in their church, 
Presbytery took up the matter in the follow¬ 
ing inquiry: Whether a particular Church 
Session has a constitutional right to make re¬ 
solves, including terms of communion, respect¬ 
ing things which have not been made terms of 
communion by any of the higher judicatories ? 
Carried in the negative. Vol. 1, pp. 80, 81. 


37 


Pisgah, October 10, 1809. 

Presbytery met according to adjournment; 
members present as above. [Messrs. Robert 
M. Cunningham, James Blythe, Samuel Ran- 
nells, Robert Stuart, and Samuel Scott, with 
Messrs. Joseph Mitchell, John Maxwell, James 
Martin, William Henry, John A. Miller, and 
Joseph Givin, Elders.] 

The Presbytery having taken into consider¬ 
ation the appeal of John Moore, a member of 
Concord congregation, do not hesitate to ex¬ 
press their decided disapprobation of the prac¬ 
tice of exposing slaves to public sale; yet, as 
we know of no part of the word of God, or of 
the Directory of our Church, which applies 
expressly to the case, we cannot confirm the 
judgment of the Session of Concord, with re¬ 
spect to the defendant* John Moore is, there¬ 
fore, restored to church privileges. 

The Session of Concord, by their represen 
tative, William Henry, appealed from the 
judgment ofoPresbytery to the Synod, and as¬ 
signed for reason that he wished for a more 
general investigation of the subject, and, if 
possible, a mode to be adopted by which a stop 
may be put to the odious practice of exposing 
slaves at public auction by professing Chris¬ 
tians, Vol. 1, pp. 226, 233, 234. 

Lbxington, Ky., July 28, 1864. 

Messrs. Editors : “The Documentary History 
of the Subject of Slavery, as recorded by the 
Presbytery of West Lexington,” grows in in¬ 
terest as I progress; and as it is brief, I pro¬ 
pose to continue it. I have tried to make it 
complete. The third volume of the records, 
covering the period from May 28, 1814, to 
April 10, 1821, has been lost for many years; 
but we can draw a fair inference as to the 
state of opinion during that time. The his¬ 
tory divides itself into sections, according to 
the views taken, and prevailing or^coutend- 
ing. Section 1 was that given in my last let¬ 
ter, covering some ten years, from April 16th, 
1799, to October 10th, 1809, in which the in¬ 
clination in Presbytery evidently was not to 
tolerate the institution of slavery at all. I 
believe Phillips and Garrison were quite young, 
if they were born at this time. 

♦Section 2. 

The subject had been referred, reverently , to 
the superior courts of the Church, and our 
records do not show what influence their de¬ 
cisions had, or whether they decided at all; 
but somehow Presbytery seemed to agree to 
submit to the existence of the institution; 
though not as it then was; so that the charac¬ 
teristic of this section from October 10th, 1809, 
to September 23d, 1825, is, that they attempted 
to modify it so that they could endure it. The 
following is their action : 

University Hall, Oct. 11th, 1811. 

In conformity to an order of Synod respect¬ 
ing the catechising of youth, the exercise of 
discipline over baptised persons, and the edu¬ 


cation and humane treatment of slaves, the 
Presbytery enjoined it upon all its members to 
use their endeavors to secure a due attention 
to these important duties, and report at our 
next stated sessions.— Records of West Lexing¬ 
ton Presbytery, vol. 2, pp. 24, 25. 

Paris Church, April 16th, 1812. 
Pursuant to an order of Presbytery, enjoin¬ 
ing it on their members to use their endeavors 
to secure a due attention to the exercise of dis¬ 
cipline over baptised persons, and the educa¬ 
tion and humane treatment of slaves; to 
which injunction it appears the members had 
paid same attention ; whereupon, on motion, 
Resolved , That Presbytery require their 
members to recommend it to the owners of 
slaves under their care, to have them taught 
to read (he Scriptures, to have them baptised, 
if practicable, and brought up in the nurture 
and admonition of the Lord* Vol. 2, p. 38. 

First Presbyterian Church, ] 
Lexington, Sept. 23d, 1812. / 
Presbytery inquired at its members, how 
they had complied with a former order re¬ 
specting the education, baptism, and humane 
treatment of slaves. It appeared that they 
had been inculcating upon the people the pro¬ 
priety and necessity of a due attention to the 
foregoing things, as far as circumstances 
would admit. Vol. 2, pp. 43, 44. 

Lexington, Ky., Aug. 5th, 1864. 
Messrs. Editors: We come next to 
Section 3, 

Of the “Documentary History of the subject of 
Slavery, as recorded by the Presbytery of 
West Lexington,” which covers the period 
from September 23, 1825, to April 6, 1836. 

The opposition which in the first section 
would scarcely tolerate slavery, and in the 
second section sought to modify it, without 
losing the influence of former ideas which ap¬ 
pears all the way through, goes now in section 
third, with more earnestness than ever, into 

The Colonization Movement , 

In which it looks to Africa as the objective 
point, and the termination of slavery as the 
great end to be reached. Presbytery ordered 
sermons to be pn ached on the subject, and 
collections to be taken up to aid the Coloniza¬ 
tion Society, and to build a church in Liberia. 
They took a negro man under their care, se¬ 
cured his education and support, and freedom; 
and licensed him, (in 1842.) Once the slave 
of Mrs. Jane Meaux, of Nicholasville, Ken¬ 
tucky, he is now the Rev. James M. Priest, of 
the Presbytery of West Africa. Like the fall of 
Vicksburg to rebels, it will be none the more 
agreeable to pro-slavery men to see, that of set 
purpose so many of these things were ordered 
to be done on the Fourth of July! 

In this section, as before, venerable n Mines 
appear, among them, that of the beloved J hn 
Breckinridge, as the Chairman of the Com- 


% 


mitteeon the Narrative, which took such high 
ground against slavery. In such company, I 
hope my old pastor, N. L. Rice, will survive the 
pity of the True Presbyterian. 

McChord’s Church, Sept. 23d, 1825. 

* * * “On motion, resolved, that each mem¬ 
ber of this Presbytery be enjoined to attend 
to the recommendation of the last General 
Assembly, in reference to a collection on every 
Fourth of July for the Colonization Society; 
and, further, that it be enjoined on each mem¬ 
ber of this Presbytery to have a sermon in 
reference to this Society preached at the same 
time, in the particular church under his 
care.”— Records of West Lexington Presbytery , 
vol. 4, p. H6. 

First Presbyterian Church, ] 
(Lexington, Ky.,) April 12th, 1826. / 

Members present as on yesterday—[James 
JBlythe, D. D., Robert Marshall, Robert Stuart, 
N. H. Hall, John Breckinridge, John Hudson, 
Samuel Steel, ministers. Elders — Messrs. 
Laird, Ferguson, Blair, McKee.] 

* * * The Rev. Mr. (J. R.) Moreland sat 
as a corresponding member. * * * 

“Messrs. Breckinridge and Hudson were 
appointed a committee to draft a Narrative of 
the State of Religion in the bounds of this 
Presbytery, to be laid before the next General 
Assembly.” 

The Presbytery remains the same up to ad¬ 
journment, and the Narrative is recorded with 
a * at the close of the proceedings, without 
any corresponding notation to show its precise 
place in the minuces of the 12th. The follow¬ 
ing is all it says on the subject of slavery, viz: 
“Slavery carries with it many evils. Tho 
spirit of revivals seems seldom to water those 
sections of the Church and country in which 
it obtains.” Yol. 4,.pp. 81, 86. 

McChord Church, Sept. 21, 1826. 

In a set of resolutions respecting the sancti¬ 
fication of the Lord’s day, resolution No. 5, it 
“is solemnly enjoined upon all our members” 
* * “conscientiously to attend upon the pub¬ 
lic means of grace in the several churches, 
with as many of their children and servants 
as can conveniently be brought with them. 
Yol. 4, p. 97. 

First Presbyterian Church, ] 
(Lexington, Ky.,} April 4th, 1828. j 

[Present, Ministers—J. Blythe, Stuart, Hall, 
Smith, Hudson, Steel, Harrison, Crane, S. V. 
Marshall, J. K. Burch; Elder Skillman.] 

* * * “Resolved , That every minister in 
this Presbytery preach a sermon in behalf of 
the Colonization Society, and that a collection 
for that Society be taken up on the next 4th of 
July.” 

October 8, 1828. 

“On inquiring whether the ministers of this 
Presbytery have complied with the injunction 
of Presbytery as to the Colonization Society, 


the following ministers reported that they had 
complied: Rev. Messrs. R. Marshall N. H. 
Hall, E. Smith, J. T, Edgar, and S. Steel. Vol. 

4, pp. 116, 124, 146. 

Versailles, (Ky.,) April 9th, 1830. 

“Resolved , That each minister who is a mem- 
ber of this Presbytery, be requested to preach 
a sermon, on some Sabbath about the 4th of 
July, in favor of the Colonization Society, and 
take up a collection to aid the efforts of said 
Society.” 

Mt. Horeb Church, Oct. 1st, 1830. 

“On inquiry, it appeared that the members 
generally had complied with the order of 
Presbytery, requiring them to preach in fa¬ 
vor of the Colonization Society, and take up a 
collection for the same.” * * * 

“ Resolved , That the ministers of this Pres¬ 
bytery be directed to have a collection taken 
up in their respective churches, to be appro¬ 
priated to the erection of a Presbyterian 
Church in the colony of Liberia. Yol. 5, pp. 
16, 39, 42. 

Georgetown, (Ky.,) April 6th, 1831. 

Present, Ministers—It. Marshall, J. Blythe, 
D. D., N. H. Hall, J T. Edgar, 0. S. Hinklev, 

5. Steel, S. V. Marshall, J. F. Price, J. C. Har¬ 
rison, Gideon Blackburn; Elders—H. Foster, 
J. Stevenson, Z. Williams, L. Munsell, J. R. 
Alexander, A. Elliott, J. Herriott, J. Logan, 
D. Castleman, D. B. Price, S. Findley, J. M. 
Phillips, W. Cogswell, J. Cox, A. McClure.] 

* * * “On inquiry, it appeared that the or¬ 

der of Presbytery to take up collections for 
building a Presbyterian Church in Liberia had 
not been complied with, and it was agreed 
that the subject be dropped at present, as 
Synod has passed a similar order.” * * * 

“The following was offered by the Rev. Dr. 
Blythe, and unanimously adopted : Resolved , 
That the Presbytery take this opportunity to 
recommend to the churches the cause of the 
American Colonization Society, and at the 
same time remind them that it is the bounden 
duty of every master and mistress to have 
their servants taught to read the Word of God; 
especially that no young servant be permitted 
to grow up in their families who cannot read, 
and that each one who is able to read be fur¬ 
nished with a Bible.” 

April 7th. 

“The following resolution was offered by the 
Rev. J C Harrison, and adopted :— Whereas 
We deem the subjects of the Colonization So¬ 
ciety and of temperance as of exceeding im¬ 
portance, therefore, Resolved , That we recom¬ 
mend to our churches and people to make these 
subjects objects of their prayers, on the days 
of the regular monthly concert.” 

* * * “Presbytery had a recess for the pur¬ 
pose of hearing an address by Robert S Finley, 
Esq., Agent of the American Colonization So¬ 
ciety, after which they proceeded to business.” 
—vol. 5, pp. 56 60-62, 66, 70. 




39 


North Middletown, (Ky,) Sept 26 1833. 

* * “It was resolved that Presbytery hold 
a familiar conversation with a young man of 
colour, recommended to their notice by brother 
Taylor, to ascertain whether he should be en¬ 
couraged by them to prosecute a course of stu¬ 
dy with a view to the gospel ministry.” * * * 

September 27th. 

“Presbytery proceeded to hold a free con¬ 
versation with James Priest, the young man of 
colour before mentioned, and the following 
minute was abopted, viz: Resolved , That this 
Presbytery now take under their care James 
Priest, the coloured man introduced by brother 
Taylor, in order to educate him with a view to 
the Gospel ministry, and that brother Taylor 
apply to his mistress for his freedom, and con¬ 
tinue his education, and that the Presbytery 
become responsible for his books and cloth¬ 
ing.”—Vol. 6, pp. 218, 220. 

Salem, April 3d, 1835. 

[Present. Ministers—R Stuart, Marshall, 
Davidson, Campbell, Forsythe, Logan, Dunlap 
Coons, Price, Scott, Wilson, W W Hall, Simrall, 
N II Hall, J Van Doreri. Elders—J M C Irwin, 
N Ferguson, J Todd, William Richardson, R 
Sargent, C McPheeters, J Stonestreet, W Col¬ 
lins, E Ilerriott, S Laird, S Griffith, J Wilson, 
H Heard, Headley, W Trimble, J Inskeep.] * * 

“On motion, it was Resolved , That it be en¬ 
joined upon every minister of this Presbytery 
who has the charge of a congregation, to make 
an arrangement for special preaching to the 
coloured people within his bounds, whenever it 
is practicable, at least once a month, and that 
thejmembers be called upon, at the fall sessions, 
to answer for the faithful endeavour to dis¬ 
charge this injunction.”—Vol. 6, pp. 12-28. 

At Frankfort, July 10th, 1885, a comunica- 
tion from W W Hall was read, containing sun¬ 
dry resolutions relative to the coloured popu¬ 
lation of our country, and urging a greater 
care for their souls. It is a fine historic paper 
and Presbytery formally approved “the object 
of said “communication;” but as it was not 
adopted, I omit it. See vol 6, p 34. 

Philander. 

Lexington, Ky., Aug. 11,1864. 

Messrs Eoitors —This letter closes my Do¬ 
cumentary History of the Subject of Slavery , as 
recorded by the Presbytery of West Lexington. 
Section 4 covers the period from April 6, 1836 
to September 7, 1853, and, I believe, to the 
present time—though I have not re-read the 
records any further than the above date, and 
have not the last volume before me—except 
the statistics of coloured communicants, what 
pertains to James Priest; a remark about 
preaching to the negroes in 1862, in the Narra¬ 
tive ; and an order in favor of a coloured man 
in 1864, who is looking to the ministry. 

It will be seen that the past action of this 
Presbytery on this subject will furnish no pre¬ 
text for schism, or standing aloof—if any pre¬ 


fer that phrase—from the General Assembly 
of 1864. 

In this section, though denouncing aboli¬ 
tionism, Presbytery, 1. Still insists on the 
baptism of slaves, and the bringing of them 
up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. 
2. Declares slavery to be “a great political 
and social evil.” 3. Commends warmly the 
cause of colonization. 4. And with much spir¬ 
it and feeling, and in unequivocal terms, de¬ 
nies that it is in favor of perpetual negro slave¬ 
ry. It remains to be seen what will be done 
next. Philander. 

Pisgah, April 6th, 1836. 

[Presbytery met, according to adjournment, 
on Wednesday morning, at 11 o’clock, and 
was opened with a sermon by Daniel Baker, 
Moderator, Ministers present—N. II. Hall, 
Baker, Van Doren, Taylor, Logan, Dunlap, 
Price, Wilson, Davidson. Elders—A. Fergu¬ 
son, A. Logan, S. M. Wallace, Dr. Railly, A. 
McClure, James Bell, W. Collins, 8. Laird, A. 
Offutt, John Bond, Hugh Moore, John H. Cur¬ 
rie, James McKee, Wm. H. (M?) Todd. 

The Rev. Joseph Lane, of the Association of 
New Hampshire, and the Rev. D. M. Winston, 
of the Presbytery of Georgia, joined the Pres¬ 
bytery. The Rev, J. C. Stiles, of the Presby¬ 
tery of Georgia, and the Rev. Mr. Burton, 
Agent of the Assembly’s Board of Education, 
took seats as corresponding members.] * * 

“The report of the Committee appointed by 
Synod on the subject of slavery, was present¬ 
ed by the Stated Clerk, at the request of the 
Secretary of the Committee, and laid on the 
table for the present.” 

“Acommunication on the subject of slavery, 
from the Presby'ery of Chilicothe, was read 
by the Stated Clerk, and on motion was laid 
on the table.” * * * 

—Records of West Lexington Presbytery , vol. 
6. pp. 52-55. 

April 8th, 1836. 

“On motion, Resolved , That the advice on 
page ninety-six of the Assembly’s Digest, be 
recommended to the churches, viz: ’That it is 
the duty of masters who are members of the 
Church, to present the children of parents in 
servitude to the ordinance of baptism, pro¬ 
vided they are in a situation to train them up 
in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, 
thus securing to them the rich advantages 
which the gospel provides.’ ”—Vol. 6. pp, 65. 

Woodford Church, Sept. 29, 1836. 

[Ministers present—Price,; Coons, Stiles, 
Campbell, R. Stuart, Davidson, Forsythe, (S. 
V.) Marshall, Logan, and C. Stewart. Elders 
—Stevenson, of Bethel; Martin, of Pisgab; 
Todd, of First Church, Lexington; Leavy, of 
McChord Church, Lexington; Gwin, of Wood¬ 
ford; McClure, of Grier’s Creek; Bell, of Wal¬ 
nut Hill; McKee, of Clear Creek; Griffith, of 
Cherry Spring; Moore, of Providence; Emer¬ 
son of Beard; Berryman, of Macedonia; Alex¬ 
ander, of Harmony; Ward, of Mount Pleasant; 
Fishback, of Green Creek.] 


40 


The following resolutions were offered by 
brother (Samuel V.) Marshall, and on motion 
adopted, and are as follows, viz: 

Whereas, There is at present much excite¬ 
ment in this community on the subject of ne¬ 
gro slavery; and whereas it is the duty of the 
Church, from motives alike of the glory of 
God and of the good of mankind, to maintain 
her influence with all people; so long as she 
can do so without compromising the princi¬ 
ples of the New Testament; and whereas both 
for this purpose, and for the purpose of pre¬ 
serving her own conscience, and the conscience 
of her members pure from the guilt of any 
improper action which may take place on the 
subject, it is important that both the members 
of our communion, and our fellow-citizens, 
should understand our principles in relation 
to slavery; therefore 

Resolved. 1. That this Presbytery views 
slavery, as it exists among us, as a great po¬ 
litical and social evil. 

Resolved , 2. That it is not inconsistent with 
the Christian profession in the present condi¬ 
tion of things in Kentucky, on this subject, 
for any person in the communion of the 
Church to hold slaves. 

Resolved , 3. That while it. is the privilege of 
the Church to exert an influence on any opin¬ 
ions and sentiments of the community, by en 
lightening the understanding, and purifying 
the hearts and feelings of their fellow-citizens, 
yet the business of legislation on the subject 
of slavery belongs exclusively to the legisla¬ 
tive authorities of the State, or to the citizens 
of the whole State in convention assembled. 

Resolved 4. That the General assembly of 
the Presbyterian Church in these United 
States “have no right to assume or exercise 
jurisdic f ion in regard to the existence of 
slavery.” 

Resolved , 5. That the Presbytery views with 
the deepest abhorence the existence and ope¬ 
rations of what are usually termed “ Abolition 
Societies ,” as well calculated, if they should 
succeed in their enterprise, to till the land 
with blood, and bring on all the horrors of a 
servile and civil war. 

Resolved , 6 . That this Presbytery views 
with increased confidence and pleasure, the 
existence and operations of the American So¬ 
cieties for colonizing the free people of color on 
the coasts of Africa, and do most cordially 
recommend the same to the liberal patronage 
of the Church and of the public at large. 

Resolved, 7, That the General Assembly alone 
as the right of fixing the terms of communion 
for any and all of the members of the Presby¬ 
terian Church in these United States; that 
these terms should be general and uniform; 
and that no Synod, Presbytery, Church Ses¬ 
sion, or other section or separate portion of 
the Church has a right to legislate on this 
subject. 

Resolved , 8, That all those Synods. Presby¬ 
teries, Church Sessions or other sections of 
the Church, which have made, or shall here¬ 


after make, non-slaveliolding, total abstinence, 
or membership in a temperance society, or 
any other thing, a term of communion in any 
part of the Presbyterian Q-hurch, not made a 
general term by the General Assembly itself, 
or shall in any other way chrtail the privileges 
of ministers or members of the Church by 
sectional laws, shall be held guilty alike of 
assuming and exercising powers which do not 
belong to it—of infringing the rights of 
church-members, and of utilawfnlly disturb¬ 
ing the peace and destroying,the harmony and 
union of the Church.”—Vol. 6 pp. 104-i07. 

Providence Church, 8ept. 27, 183 7. 

[Ministers present—R. Stuart N. H. Hall, 
J. N. Blackburn, J C. Stiles, D. M. Winston, 
C. A. Campbell, VV. W. Hall, W. H. Forsythe, 
S. V. Marshall, Jacob F.'Price, C. S'ewart, R. 
Davidson, J. F. Coons. Elders present—Jas. 
Bell, John M. McCalla, Si M. Wallace, Samuel 
Wingfield, Franklin Bell, John II. Berryman, 
Andrew Scott, William Lowry, William. Em¬ 
erson, Matthew Barclay, John Points, William 
Herriott, J. M C. Irwin, Joseph Clark, M. J. 
Caldwell, Otho Robards, William Cogswell, 
William McBride, R. B. Crooks, John Allen, 
William T. Allen.] ■* * * 

A letter from the Oneida Presbytery, on the 
subject of abolition, was presented to Presby¬ 
tery by the Stated Clerk, and on motion it was 
laid on the table. , v - 

September 20, 1837. 

[Members present as above, except elder J. 
Clark had leave of absence; G. W. Coons was 
ordained; and, C. Phillips from the Presby¬ 
tery of Ebenezer, sat asa corresponding mem¬ 
ber.] 

“The following preamble and resolutions 
were on motion received and adopted, and are 
as follows, viz: 

Whereas, Great efforts have been made by 
certain religious presses known to be connected 
with, and the supporters of, the interests of 
what is commonly called and is known as the 
New-school party in the Presbyterian Church 
in these United States, to identify the doc¬ 
trines of what is usually termed the Old-school 
party in said Church with the doctrines of 
slavery, aud have represented said Old-school 
party as the firm supporters of perpetual negro 
slavery as it now exists in these United States, 
as a system for ever; therefore 

Resolved , 1. That all such representations 
are absolutly false and slanderous. 

Resolved . 2. That in the deliberate appre¬ 
hensions of this Presbytery, it is solemnly 
feared that all such allegations, if not known 
by those who made them to be wholly false 
and unfounded in truth, were at least publish¬ 
ed and propagated for the truly unworthy 
purpose of enlisting the sympathies of abo¬ 
litionists and Northern men in favor of New- 
schoolism . and of impairing the religious in¬ 
fluence of said Old school party in the Pres¬ 
byterian Church.”—Vol. 8. pp. 137-138. 


41 


As still further illustrative of the sentiment 
touching slavery, which prevailed in the 
Presbyterian Church in former times, we 
propose to append the Address of the Synod 
of Kentucky, in 1835, to the people under 
their charge, relative to the extinction of 
slavery among themj The Declaration and 
Testimony party in this State affirm that 
those who adhere to the Assembly and the 
Old Synod, do not hold the conservative views 
of slavery, which were held by the Presby¬ 
terians of this Synod in former times. With 
amazing recklessness of tru^h, it has been 
asierted that the ministers and elders of the 
Synod thirty years ago, held the same views 
of slavery now held by the Declaration and 
Testimony! Read again the extract above 
quoted from that document, and then the fol¬ 
lowing : 

Address of the Synod of Kentucky on Slavery , 
in 1835. 

Dear Brethrejj— The will of the Synod has 
made it our duty to lay before you “a plan for 
the moral and religious instruction, as well as 
for the future emancipation of the slaves,” 
under your care. VVe feel the responsibility 
and difficulty of the duty to which the church 
has called us, yet the character of those 
whom we address, strongly encourages us to 
hope that labor will not be in vain. You pro¬ 
fess to be governed by the principles and pre¬ 
cepts of a holy religion. You recognize the 
fact that you have yourselves “been made 
free" by the blood of the Son of God, and you 
believe that you have been imbued with a por¬ 
tion of the same spirit which was in “Him, 
who though he was rich,'yet for our sakes be¬ 
came poor.” When we point out to such per¬ 
sons their duty, and call upon them to fulfill 
it our appeal cannot be altogether fruitless. 
But we have a still stronger ground for our 
encouragement in our firm conviction, that, the 
cause which we advocate is the cause of God, 
and that his assistance will make it finally 
prevail. May He “who hears the cry of the 
poor and needy,” and who has commanded to 
let the “oppressed go free,” give to each one 
of us wisdom to know our duty, and strength 
to do it. 

We earnestly entreat you, brethren, to re¬ 
ceive our communication in the same spirit of 
kindness in which it is made, and permit 
neither prejudice nor interest to close your 
minds against the reception of the truth, or 
steel your hearts against the convictions of 
conscience. Very soon it will be a matter of 
no moment whether we have had large or small 
possessions on the earth, but it will be of 
infinite importance whether or not we have 


conscientiously sought out the will of God arid 
done it. 

We all admit that the system of slavery, 
which exists among us, is not right. Why, 
then, do we assist in perpetuating it? Why 
do we make no serious effort to terminate it? 
Is it not because our perception'-of its' sinful¬ 
ness is very feeble and indistinct', .while our 
perception of the difficulties.pf instructing 
and emancipating our slaved^s Strong and , 
clear? As long as we believe thart slavery, as 
it exists among us, is a light evil in the sight 
of God, so long will we feel inclined to pro¬ 
nounce every plan that can be devised for its • 
termination inexpedient or impracticable. 
Before, then, we unfold our plan, we wish to 
examine the system, and try it by the princi¬ 
ples which religion teaches. If it shall not 
be thus proved to be an abomination in the 
sight of a just and holy God, we shall not so¬ 
licit your concurrence in any plan for its ab¬ 
olition. But if, when fairly examined, it shall 
be seen to be a thing which God abhors, we 
may surely expect that no trifling amount of 
trouble or loss will deter you from lending 
your efforts to its extermination. 

Slavery is not the same all the world over. 
And to ascertain its character, in any particu¬ 
lar state or country, we must examine the con¬ 
stituents and effects of the kind of slavery 
which there exists. The system as it exists 
among us, and is constituted by our laws, con¬ 
sists of three distinct parts—a deprivation of the 
right of property , a deprivation oj personal lib¬ 
erty ,, and a deprivation of personal security. In 
all its parts, it is manifestly a violation of the 
laws of God as revealed by the light of na¬ 
ture, as well as the light of revelation. 

l. A part hf our system of slavery consists in 
depriving human beings of the right to acquire 
and hold property. Does it need any proof to 
show that God has given to all human beings a 
right to the proceeds of their own labor? The 
heathen acknowledge it—every one feels it. 
The Bible is full of denunciations against 
those who withhold from others the fruits of 
their exertions. “Wo unto him that buildeth 
his house by unrighteousness, and his cham¬ 
bers hjy wrong; that useth his neighbor’s ser¬ 
vice without wages, and giyeth him not for 
his work.”* Does' an act which, is wrong, 
when done once and toward one individual, 
become right because it is practiced daily and 
hourty, and toward thousands ? Does the Just 
and Ho’y One frown the less upon injustice, 
because it is systematically practiced, and is 
sanctioned by the laws of the land ? If the 
chicanery of the law should enable us to es¬ 
cape the payment of our debts, or if a human 
legislature should discharge us from our obli¬ 
gations to our creditors, could we, without 
deep guilt, withhold from our neighbors that 
which is their due ? No ; we all recognize the 
principle that the laws of the |God of nature 
can never be replaced by any legislature under 

*Jer. 22: 13. See also James 5; 4. Lev. 19:13. Bent, 
24; 14,15. 



42 


heaven. These laws will endure, when the 
statutes of earth shall have crumbled with the 
parchments on which they are enrolled—and 
by these laws we know that we must be judged, 
in the day in which the destinies of our souls 
shall be determined. 

2. The deprivation of personal liberity forms 
another part of our system of slavery. Not only 
has the slave nc right to his wife and chil¬ 
dren, but he has no right even to himself. His 
very body, his muscles, his bones, his flesh, are 
all the property of another. The movements 
of his limbs are regulated by the will of a 
master. He may be sold, like a beast of the 
field—he may be transported in chains like a 
felon. Was the blood of our revolution shed 
to establish a false principle, when it was 
poured out in defense of the assertion that “all 
men are created equalthat “they are en¬ 
dowed by their Creator with certain inaliena¬ 
ble rights; that among these are life, liberty, 
and the pursuit of happiness? If it be a vi¬ 
olation of the rights of nature to deprive men 
of their political freedom , the injustice is sure¬ 
ly much more flagrant, when we rob them of 
personal liberty. The condition of a subject is 
enviable compared with the condition of the 
slave. We are shocked at the despotism exer¬ 
cised over the Poles. But theirs is a political 
yoke, and is light compared with the personal 
yoke that bows down the two millions of our 
colored countrymen. Does European injustice 
lose its foul character when practiced, with ag¬ 
gravations, in America ? 

Still farther, the deprivation of personal 
liberty is so complete, that it destroys the 
rights of conscience. Our sj^stem, as estab¬ 
lished by law, arms the master with power to 
prevent his slave from worshiping God, ac¬ 
cording to the dictates of his own conscience. 
The owner of human beings among us, may 
legally restrain them from assembling to hear 
the instructions of divine truth, or even from 
ever uniting their hearts and voices in social 
prayer and praise to Him who created them. 
God alone is Lord over the conscience. Yet 
our system, defrauding alike our Creator and 
our slaves, confers upon men this prerogative 
of Deity. Argument is unnecessary to show 
the guilt and madness of such a system. And 
do we not participate in its criminality *if we 
uphold it ? 

3. The deprivation of personal security is the 
remaining constituent of our system of slavery. 
The time was, in our own as well as in other 
countries, when even the life of the slave was 
absolutely in the hands of the master. It is 
not so now among us. The life of a bondman 
cannot be taken with impunity. But the law 
extends its protection no farther. Cruelty 
may be carried to any extent, provided life be 
spared. Mangling, imprisonment, starvation, 
every species of torture, may be inflicted upon 
him, and he has no redress. But, not content 
with thus laying the body of the slave de¬ 
fenseless at the foot of the master, our system 
proceeds still farther, and strips him in a great 


measure of all protection against the inhu¬ 
manity of any othr White man, who may 
choose to maltreat him. The laws prohibit the 
evidence of a slave against a white man from 
being received in a court of justice. So that 
wantonness and cruelty may be exercised, by 
any man, with impunity, upon these unfortu¬ 
nate people, provided none witness it but 
those of their own color. In describing such 
a condition, we may well adopt the language 
of sacred writ: “Judgment is turned away 
backward, and justice standeth afar off, and 
truth is fallen in the street, and equity can¬ 
not enter. And the Lord saw it, and it dis¬ 
pleased Him that there was no judgment.” 

Such is the essential character of our slave¬ 
ry. Without any crime on the part of its un¬ 
fortunate subjects, they are deprived for life, 
and their posterity after them, of the right to 
property, of the right to liberty, and of the 
right to personal security. These odious fea¬ 
tures are not the excrescences upon the sys¬ 
tem, they are the system itself —they are its es¬ 
sential constituent parts. And can any man 
believe that such a thing as this is not sinful 
—that it is not hated by God—and ought not 
to be abhorred and abolished by man ? 

But there are certain effects , springing nat¬ 
urally and necessarily out of such a system, 
which must also be considered, in forming a 
proper estimate of its character. 

1. Its most striking elfect is to deprave and 
degrade its subjects , by removing from them the 
strongest natural checks to human corruption. As 
there are certaiu laws impressed upon the ele¬ 
ments, by which God works to preserve the 
beauty and order of the material creation; 
so there are certain principles of human na¬ 
ture, by which He works to save the moral 
world from ruin. These principles operate on 
every man in his natural condition of free¬ 
dom—restraining his vicious propensities, and 
regulating his deportment. The fires of in¬ 
nate depravity which, if permitted to burst 
forih, would destroy the individual, and deso¬ 
late society, are thus,'measurably repressed; 
and the decencies and enjoyments of life are 
preserved The wisdom and goodness of God 
are thus seen, in implanting in man a sense 
of character, a desire for property, a love for 
distinction, a thirst for power, and a zeal for 
family advancement. All these feelings, 
working in the minds of individuals (though 
not unmixed with evil,) combine to promote 
their own happiness, and the welfare of com¬ 
munities; and they are inferior in the good 
which they produce only to those high re¬ 
ligious principles, which constitute the image 
of God in the soul of man. The presence of 
these principles alone can compensate for their 
absence. Whenever, then, these natural feel¬ 
ings are crushed or eradicated in any human 
being, he is stripped of the nobler attributes 
of humanity, and is degraded into a creature 
of mere appetite and passion. His sensuality 
is the only chord by which you can draw him. 
Ilis hopes and fears all concentrate upon the 


objects of his appetites. He sinks far down 
toward a level with the beast of the field, and 
can be moved to action only by such appeals 
as influence the lunatic and the brute. This 
is the condition to which slavery reduces the 
great mass of those who wear its brutalizing 
yoke. Its effects upon their souls are far 
worse than its effects upon their bodies. Char¬ 
acter, property, destination, power and family 
respectability, are all withdrawn from the 
reach of the slave. No object is presented to 
excite aud cultivate those higher feelings, 
whose exercise would repress his passions and 
regulate his appetites. Thus, slavery deranges 
and ruins the moral machinery of man, it 
cuts the sinews of the soul, it extracts from 
human nature the salt that purifies and pre¬ 
serves it, and leaves a corrupting mass of ap¬ 
petite and passion. 

2. It dooms thousands of human beings to hope¬ 
less ignorance. The acquisition of knowledge 
requires exertion; and the man who has to 
continue through life in bondage, has no 
strong motive of interest to induce such exer¬ 
tion; for knowledge is not valuable to him, as 
to one who eats the fruits of his own labors. 
The acquisition of knowledge requires also fa¬ 
cilities of books, teachers and time, which can 
be only adequately furnished by masters ; and 
those who desire to perpetuate slavery will 
never furnish these facilities. If slaves are 
educated it must involve some outlay on the 
part of the master. And what reliance for such a 
sacrifice can be placed on the generosity and 
virtue of one who looks on them as his prop¬ 
erty, and who has been trained to consider 
every dollar expended on them as lost, unless 
it contributes to increase their capacity for 
yielding him valuable service? He will have 
them taught to work, and will ordinarily feed 
and clothe them so as to enable them to per¬ 
form their work to advantage, But more 
thau this, it is inconsistent with our knowl¬ 
edge of human nature to expect that he will 
do for them. The present state of instruction 
among this race answers exactly to what we 
might thus naturally anticipate. Throughout 
our whole land, so far as we can learn, there 
is but one school in which, during the week, 
slaves con be taught. The light of three or 
four Sabbath schools is seen, glimmering 
through the darkness that covers the black 
population of a whole State. Here and there 
a family is found, where humanity and reli¬ 
gion impel the master, mistress or children to 
the laborious task of private instruction. 
Great honor is due to those engaged in this 
philanthropic and self-denying course, and 
their reward shall be received in the day, 
when even a cup of cold water, given from 
Christian motives, shall secure a recompense. 
But, after all, what is the utmost amount of 
instruction given to slaves? Those who enjoy 
the most of it, are fed witli but the crumbs of 
knowledge which fall from their master's ta¬ 
ble—they are clothed with the mere shreds 
and tatters of learning. 


Nor is it to be expected that this state of 
things will become better, unless it is deter¬ 
mined that slavery shall cease. The impression 
is almost universal that intellectual elevation 
unfits men for servitude, and renders it im¬ 
possible to retain them in this condition. This 
impression is upquestionably correct. The 
weakness and ignorance of their victims is the 
onl,y safe foundation on which injustice and 
oppression can rest. And the effort to keep in 
bondage men to whom knowledge has imparted 
power, would be like the insane attempt of the 
Persian tyrant, to chain the waves of the sea, 
and whip its boisterous waters into submis¬ 
sion. We may as soon expect to fetter the 
winds, seal up the clouds, or extinguish the 
fires of the volcano, as to prevent enlightened 
minds from recovering their natural condition 
of freedom. Bence, in some of our States, 
laws have been enacted, prohibiting, under 
severe penalties, the instruction of the blacks; 
and even where such laws do not exist, there 
are formidable numbers who oppose, with 
deep hostility, every effort to enlighten the 
mind of the negro. These men are determined 
that slavery shall be perpetuated, and they 
know that their universal • education must bo 
followed by their universal emancipation. 
They are then acting wisely, according to the 
wisdom of this world, when they deny educa¬ 
tion to slaves—they are adopting a measure 
necessary to secure their determined purpose. 
It is, however, such policy as the robber ex¬ 
hibits, who silences in death the voices that 
might accuse him, and buries in the grave the 
witnesses of his crimes. He is determined to 
pursue his occupation, and his safety in it re¬ 
quires that he should not indulge in the weak¬ 
ness of keeping conscience. How horrible 
must be that system, which, in the opinion of 
even its strongest advocates, demands, as the 
necessary condition of^its existence, that 
knowledge should be shut out from the minds 
of those who live under it—that they should 
be reduced as nearly as possible to the level 
of brutes or living machines—that the powers 
of their souls should be crushed. Let each 
one of us ask, Can such a system be aided, 
or even tolerated, withoutdeep criminality? 

3. It deprives its subjects , in a great measure , 
of the privileges of the gospel. Tou| may be 
startled at this statement, and feel disposed to 
exclaim, “Our slaves are always permitted, 
and even eneouraged, to attend upon the ordi¬ 
nances of worship.” But a candid and close 
examination will show the correctness of our 
charge. The privileges of the gospel, as en¬ 
joyed by the white population of this land, 
consist in free access to the Scriptures , of a 
regular gospel ministry , and domestic means of 
grace. Neither of these are, to any extent 
worth naming, enjoyed by slaves, as a mo¬ 
ment’s consideration will satisfactorily show. 
The law, as it is here, does not prevent free 
access to the Scriptures , but ignorance, the 
natural result of their condition, does. Ihe 
Bible is before them, but it is to them a sealed 


44 


book. “The light shineth in the darkness, but 
the darkness comprehendeth it not.” Like the 
paralytic, who lay for years by the pool of 
Betliesda, the waters of healing are near 
them, b :t uo kind hand enables them to try 
their efficacy. Very few enjp} 1 - the advantages 
of a regular gospel ministry. They are, it is 
true, permitted general^ and often encour¬ 
aged, to attend upon the ministrationsjspecial- 
ly designed for their masters. But the in¬ 
structions communicated on such occasions 
are above the level of their capacities. They 
listen as to prophesyings in an unknown 
tongue. The preachors of their own color are 
still farther from ministering to their spirit¬ 
ual wants—as these impart to them, not of 
their knowledge, but of their ignorance: they 
heat their animal feelings, but do not kindle 
the flame of intelligent devotion. It has been 
proposed by some zealous and devoted friends 
of the colored race, to supply the diffcienoy of 
gospel ministrations among them. We need 
not here speculate on the probable results of 
such a scheme, if carried into effect, in a com¬ 
munity where there is no intention to emanci¬ 
pate; for before theVe is found among us be¬ 
nevolence enough to adopt and execute it, on 
a scale large enough to effect any highly val¬ 
uable purpose, the community will be already 
ripe for measures of emancipation. Such a 
spirit of kindness toward this unfortunate 
race as this scheme proposes, can never co¬ 
exist with a determination to keep them in 
hopeless bondage. Farther, there are no 
houses of worship exclusively devoted, to the 
colored population. Tiie galleries of our own 
churches, which are set apart to their use, 
would not hold the tenth part of their num¬ 
bers—and even those few -eats are, in gener¬ 
al,. thinly occupied. So that, as a body, it is 
evident, that our slaves do not enjoy the pub¬ 
lic ordinances ot religion. Domestic means of 
grace are still more rare among them. Here 
and tiiere a family is found, whose servants 
are taught to bow with their masters around 
the fireside altar. But their peculiarly ad¬ 
verse circumstances, combined with the natu¬ 
ral alienation of their hearts from God, render 
abortive the slight efforts of most masters to 
induce their attendance on the domestic ser¬ 
vices of religiou. And if we visit the cot¬ 
tages of those slaves who live apart from their 
masters, where do we find them reading their 
Bibles and kneeling together before a throne 
of mercy? Family ordinances of religion 
are almost unknown among the blacks. We 
do not wish to exaggerate the description of 
this deplorable religious condition of our col¬ 
ored population. We know that instances of 
true piety are frequently found among them — 
but these instances, we all know, to be awfully 
disproportionate to their numbers, and to the 
extent of those means of grace which exist 
around them. When the missionaries of the 
cross enter a heathen land, their hope of fully 
Christianizing it rests upon the fact, that they 
oan array and bring to bear upon the minds 


cf those children of ignorance and sin, all 
those varied means which God has appointed 
for the reformation of man. But while the 
system of slavery continues among us, these 
means can never be efficiently and fully em¬ 
ployed for the conversion of tlxe degraded sons 
of Africa. Yet “God hath made them of one 
blood” with ourselves; hath provided for them 
the same redemption; hath in his providence 
cast souls upon our care, and hath clearly in¬ 
timated to us the doom of him who “seeth his 
brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels 
of compassion from him.” 

4. This system licenses and produces great 
cruelty. The law places the whip in the hands 
of the master, and its use, provided he avoid 
destroying life, is limited only by his own 
pleasure. Considering the absolute power 
with which our people are armed, it must be 
ackno wledged that the treatment of their de¬ 
pendents is, in general, singularly humane. 
Mauy circumstances operate here to mitigate 
the rigors of perpetual servitude: aud it ia 
probably the fact that no body of slaves have 
been ever better fed, better clothed, and less 
abused, than the slaves of Kentucky. Still 
they have no security for their comfort but the 
humanity and generosity of men who have 
been trained to regard them not as brethren, 
but as mere property. Humanity and gener¬ 
osity are, at best poor guarantees for the pro¬ 
tection of those who cannot assert their rights, 
and over whom the law throws no protection. 
Our owncondition we would feel to be wretched 
indeed, if no law secured us from the insults 
and maltreatment even of our equals. But su¬ 
periority naturally begets contempt; and con¬ 
tempt generates maltreatment, for checking 
which we can rely not on virtue, but only on 
law. There are, in our land, hundreds of 
thousands clothed with arbitrary powers over 
those whom they are educated io regard as 
their property, as the instruments of their 
will, as creatures beneath their sympathy, de¬ 
void of all the feelings which dignify human¬ 
ity, aud but one remove above cattle. Is it 
not certain that many of these hundreds of 
thousands will inflict outrages on their de¬ 
spised dependants? There are now in our 
whole land two millions of human beings 
exposed, defenseless, to every insult and 
every injury short of maimingor death, which 
their fellow-men may choose to inflict. They 
suffer all that can be inflicted by wanton ca¬ 
price, by grasping avarice, by brutal lust, by 
malignant spite, and by insane anger. Their 
happiness is the sport of every whim, and the 
prey of every passion, that may, occasionally 
or habitually, infest the master’s bosom. If 
we could calculate the amount of woe endured 
by ill-treated slaves, it would overwhelm every 
compassionate heart; it would move even the 
obdurate to sympathy. There is also a vast 
sum of suffering inflicted upou the slave by 
humane masters, as a punishment for that idle¬ 
ness and misconduct which slavery naturally 
produces. The ordinary motives to exertion 


45 


in men are withdrawn from the slave. Some 
unnatural stimulus must then be substituted, 
and the whip presents itself as the readiest 
and most efficient. But the application of the 
whip to produce industry, is like the applica¬ 
tion of the galvanic fluid to produce muscular 
exertion. The effect is powerful indeed, but 
momentary; and if often applied, it is ex¬ 
haustive and destructive to the system. It 
can never be used as a substitute for the 
healthful and agreeable nervous stimulus with 
which nature has supplied us. Equally vain 
is the attempt to supply by the whip the de¬ 
ficiency of natural motives to exertion; it 
produces misery and degradation. Yet inad¬ 
equate as is this substitute, it is the best that 
can be had—it must be used while the system 
lasts—the condition of the slave is unnatural, 
and his treatment must correspond to his con¬ 
dition. We are shocked to hear of epicures, 
who cause the animals on which they feast to 
be whipped to death, that their flesh may be 
more delicate and delicious to the taste. We 
feel it to be disgustiug’and intolerable cruelty 
thus to inflict pain even upon a beast, merely 
to satisfy the cravings of luxury; and shall 
we excuse ourselves, if a desire for ease or 
wealth, leads us to sanction, sustain, and as¬ 
sist in perpetuating, a system which, as long 
as it lasts, must lacerate the bodies and grind 
down the feelings of millions of rational and 
immortal beings? 

Brutal stripes, and all the varied kinds of 
personal indignities, are not the only species 
of cruelty which slavery licenses. The law 
does not recognize the family relations of a 
slave, and extends tp him no protection in the 
enjoyment of domestic endearments. The 
members of a slave family may be forcibly 
separated, so that they shall never more meet 
until the final judgment. And cupidity often 
induces the masters to practice what the law 
allows. Brothers and sisters, parents and 
children, husbands and wives, are torn asun¬ 
der an<- permitted to see each other no more. 
These acts are daily occurring in the midst of 
us. The shrieks and the agony often witnessed 
on such occasions, proclaim with a trumpet 
tongue the iniquity and cruelty of our system. 
They cry of these sufferers goes up to the ears 
of the Lord of Sabaoth. There is not a neigh 
borhood where these heartrending scenes are 
not displayed. There is not a village or road 
that doe 3 not behold the sad procession of 
manacled outcasts, whose chains and mourn¬ 
ful countenances tell that they are exiled by 
force from all that their hearts held dear. 
Our church, years ago, raised its voice of 
solemn warning against this flagrant viola¬ 
tion of every principle of mercy, justice and 
humanity. We blush to announce to you and 
to the world, that this warning has often been 
disregarded, even by those who hold to our 
communion. Cases have often occurred in our 
own denomination, where professors of the re¬ 
ligion of mercy have torn the mother from 
her children, and sent her into a merciless and 


returnless exile. Yet acts of discipline have 
rarely followed such conduct. Far be it from 
us to ascribe to our people generally a partici¬ 
pation in these deeds, or a sympathy with 
them—they abhor and loathe them. But 
while the system, of which these cruelty are 
the legitimate offspring, is tolerated among us, 
it is exceedingly difficult to inflict punishment 
upon their perpetrators. If we commence dis¬ 
cipline for any acts which the’laws of slavery 
sanction, where shall we stop? What princi¬ 
ple is there which will justify us in cutting 
off a twig or a branch of this poison tree, that 
will not, if fairly carried out, force us to pro¬ 
ceed, and hew down its trunk, and dig up its 
roots? These cruelties are only the loathsome 
ulcers, which show corruption in the blood and 
rottenness in the bones of this system. They 
may be bound up and mollified with ointment 
—they may be hidden from sight; but they 
cannot be entirely removed until there is a 
thorough renovation within. Our churches 
cannot be entirely pure, even from the grosser 
pollutions of slavery, until w* are. willing to 
pledge ourselves to the destruction of the whole 
system. 

The voice of the civilized world has been 
lifted up in execration of the despot who re¬ 
cently dragged numbers of the unhappy Foies 
from their country, separating husbands and 
wives, parents and children. But they are his 
property by the same tenure by which we hold 
our slaves; and has he not a right, he may ex¬ 
claim, to do as he pleases with his own? Nay, 
the security and peace of his dominions re¬ 
quire this cruelty. He is not willing to re¬ 
linquish the property w hick he inherited; and he 
may tell us, and tell us truly, that it cannot 
be retained in safety without the adoption of 
these horrid measures. Can we condemn his 
conduct, and yet justify our system of slave¬ 
ry ? Or can we condemn both, and yet be 
guiltless, if we use no efficient exertions to 
terminate these cruelties among us ? , 

5. It produces general licentiousness among the 
slaves. Marriage, as a civil ordinance , they can¬ 
not enjoy. Our laws do not recognize this re¬ 
lation a3 existing among them ; and, of course, 
do not enforce by any sanction the observance 
of its duties. Indeed, until slavery “waxeth 
old and tendeth to decay,” there cannot be 
any legal recognition of the marriage rite, or 
the enforcement of the consequent duties. For 
all regulations on this subject would limit the 
master’s absolute right of property in his 
slaves. In his disposal of them he would no 
longer be at liberty to consult merely his 
own interest. He could no longer separate 
the wife and husband to suit the convenience 
or interest of the purchaser, no matter how 
advantageous might be the terms offered. As 
the wife and husband do not always belong to 
the same owner, and are not often wanted by 
the same purchaser, their duties to each other 
would thus, if enforced by law, frequently 
conflict with the interests of the master. 
Hence all the marriage that could ever be al- 


46 


lowed to them, would be a mere contract void¬ 
able at the master’s pleasure. Their present 
quasi marriages are just such contracts, and 
are continually thus voided. They are, in this 
way, brought up to consider the matrimonial 
engagement as a thing not binding, and they 
act accordingly. Many of them are united 
without, even the sham and forceless ceremony 
which is sometimes used. They, to use their 
phraseology, “take up with” each other, and 
live together as long as it suits their mutual 
convenience or inclination. This wretched 
system inevitably produces revolting licenti¬ 
ousness. This feature in the slave character 
is so striking, as to induce in many minds the 
idea that the negro is naturally repugnant to 
the restraints of matrimony. From the am¬ 
ple and repeated testimonies, however, of such 
travelers as Park and Lauder, who visited this 
race in the.r native land, we learn that their 
character is, in this respect, in Africa, the re¬ 
verse of what it is here—that they regard the 
marriage rite with remarkable sacredness, 
and scrupulously fulfill its duties. Our fa¬ 
miliarity with this consequence of s’avery 
prevents us from regarding it with the horror 
which it would, under other circumstances, in¬ 
spire. The sacredness of the marriage rite is 
the bulwark of moralty—the cornerstone of 
domestic happiness. It is the foundation on 
which alone the whole fabric of an organized 
and virtuous community can be built. On it 
must rest all those family relations, which 
bind together and cement society. Without it, 
we might herd together like brutes, but we 
could no longer live together as human beings. 
There would be no families, no strong ties of 
kindred, no domestic endearments, softening 
the manners and curbing the passions. Sel¬ 
fish, sensual and unrestrained, man would ex¬ 
ercise his reason only to minister to the more 
groveling propensities of his nature. Any 
set of meu will approximate to this condition, 
just in proportion to their approximation to 
the practical abolition of matrimonial re¬ 
straints. And certainly never, in any civil¬ 
ized country, has respect for these restraints 
been more nearly obliterated than it has been 
among our blacks. Thus the working of our 
system of slavery diffuses a moral pestilence 
among its subjects, tending to wither and 
blight everything that is naturally beautiful 
and good iu the character of man. Can this 
system be tolerated without sin? 

0. This system demoralizes Ike whites as well 
as the blacks. Masters are in a great degree, 
irresponsible for the exercise of their power; 
and they generally feel that their object iu 
possessing and exercising their dominion is 
their own utility, and not the good of those 
over whom they rule. Now, power can never 
be held or exercised without moral injury to 
its possessor , unless its exercise be subject to 
responsibility, or unless it be held mainly for 
the good of its subjects , not of its possessor. The 
lives of absolute monarchs furnish us with our 
most d s p'-ting p‘c‘uros of hu oa > de«riv ity. 


Few, even of those who have been previously 
trained to self-control and virtue, have been 
able to withstand the corruptin i nfluence of 
unrestrained power. And the effect is, in some 
measure, the same where despotic authority is 
possessed and exercised in a smaller sphere. 
No man acquainted with the frailty of the hu¬ 
man heart, would desire uncontrolled domin¬ 
ion over his fellow-men. We are sufficiently 
prone by nature to tyranny, and a disregard 
of the rights and interests of others, without 
having these feelings developed, cultivated, 
and matured by a sense of irresponsibility, 
and by the habit of regarding ourselves as 
born to command, and others as born to obey. 
Where a consciousness of responsibility, equal¬ 
ity, and dependence, does not check their 
growth, hard-heart.edness, selfishness, and ar¬ 
rogance, are, in most men, fearfully exhibited. 
And these odious traits of character must be 
peculiarly marked in those who have, from 
childhood, been trained in the school of des¬ 
potism The hand of one of our greatest 
statesmen has strikingly portrayed the demor¬ 
alizing effects of this system on the minds and 
manners of the ruling class. “There must, 
doubtless,” says Mr. Jefferson, “be an unhap¬ 
py influence on the manners of our people, 
produced by the existence of slavery among 
us. The whole commerce between master and 
slave is a perpetual exercise of the most bois¬ 
terous passions, the most unrelenting despot¬ 
ism on the oue part, and degrading submission 
on the other. Our children see this, aad 
learn to imitate it; for man is an imitative 
animal. This quality is the germ of all edu¬ 
cation in him. From his cradle to his grave, 
he is learning to do what he sees others do. 
If a parent could find no motive either in his 
philanthropy or self-love, for restraining the 
intemperauce of passion toward his slave, it 
should always be a sufficient one that a child 
is present. But generally it is not sufficient. 
The parent storms, the child looks on, catches 
the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs, 
in the circle of smaller slaves, gives a loose rein 
to the worst passions, and thus nursed, educa¬ 
ted and daily exercised in tyranny, can not 
but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. 
The man must be a prodigy, who can retain 
his manners and morals undepraved by such 
circumstances.”* Such, according to the tes¬ 
timony of one who had marked its operation 
with a philosopher’s eye, is the character 
which slavery forms—a character perfectly 
the reverse of that which the gospel requires. 

We forbear to picture before you the conse¬ 
quences of that indolence and aversion to all 
manual occupations, which are necessarily en¬ 
gendered in youth, surrounded by a servile 
class who are engaged in these pursuits. 
These consequences you have all seen, and 
felt and deplored. Such are the evil effeots to 
ourselves and our children of the system 
which we support. Thus are we made to eat 
o 1 ' tin hi (er food which we prepare for others, 

5 'J fW»< n’t- Nt '.«> * it Virgin’*, j . CIS, 


47 


and drink of the poisoned cup which our own 
hands mingled—the sword with which we un¬ 
thinkingly destroy others, is thus made to 
drink our own blood. These evils, if duly es¬ 
timated, are alone sufficient to arm us with im¬ 
placable hostility toward the system from 
which they spring. And in view of these ef¬ 
fects, we can almost adopt the opinion ex¬ 
pressed a few years since on the scaffold by 
one who was executed for the murder of a 
slave—‘ Slavery is a bad system; it is even 
worse for the master than it is for the slaves.” 
It is a system which reminds us of the dark 
magic of ancient days—an art as fatal to 
those who exercised it as to those who were 
their victims. 

7. This system draws down upon us the ven¬ 
geance of Heaven. “God is just,” and “He will 
render to every one according to his works.” 
Oppression can never escape unpunished, 
while He who has emphatically declared that 
He is the “Judge of the widow,” and the 
“Father of the fatherless,” is on the throne of 
the universe. “If thou forbear to deliver 
them that are drawn to death, and those that 
are ready to be slain; if thou sayest, Behold, 
we knew it not; doth not He that pondereth 
the heart consider it? and He that.keepeth thy 
soul, doth He not know it? and shall He not 
rentier to every man according to His works?” 
Not a sparrow falls to the ground, we are told, 
without the notice of God—how much more 
doth he mark the abuse and oppression of a 
creature who bears his own peculiar image? 
“The very hairs of our head are all number¬ 
ed”—much more are the groanings of the op¬ 
pressed and sighings of the prisoner recorded 
by Him who says that His name is “ Gracious," 
and that His “ear is ever open to the cry of 
the poor and needy.” The blood of Abel did 
not sink into the ground unheeded—it called 
down judgment upon the guilty man who had 
smitten his brother, and it drove him out a 
wanderer from the land of his birth—a fugi¬ 
tive from the presence of the Lord. But the 
sore cry of millions of the down-trodden has 
gone up to heaven from the midst of us; this 
cry is still swelling upward; and if there be 
righteousness on the throne of the universe, it 
must bring down vials of wrath upon the 
heads of all who are engaged in this guilty 
work. And when He cometh to execute ven¬ 
geance, “who may abide the day of his com¬ 
ing?” Who can stand up before his indigna¬ 
tion? Who can stand up in the fierceness of 
His anger? We see the truth of what the 
prophet declares, that “the Lord is slow to 
anger”—but we are assured that it is equally 
true, that He is “great in power, and will not 
at all acquit the wicked: the Lord hath His 
way in the whirlwind and in the storm, and 
the clouds are the dust of his feet.” 

Brethren, we profess to be Christians—we 
reverence the holy revelation which God has 
given—we look to its precepts for guidance, 
and to its denunciations for warnings. We 
know that the principles of the divine deal¬ 


ings are the same in every age, and that what 
God said to those of old, when we are in simi¬ 
lar circumstances, He sailh unto us. Listen, 
then, to one of the many intimations He lias 
given us cf the way in which he will punish 
it. “The people of the land have used op¬ 
pression, and exercised robbery, aud have 
vexed the poor and needy; yea, they have op¬ 
pressed the stranger wrongfully, and I sought 
for a man among them, that should stand in 
the gap before me for the land, that 1 should 
not destroy it; but I found none. Therefore I 
have poured out mine indignation upon them; 

I have consumed them with the fire of my 
wrath; their own way have I recompensed 
upon their heads, saith the Lord.”'* Can we 
despise the instructions of the Almighty? 
Shall we shut our eyes and close our cars 
against the admonitions of the Great Judge of 
the earth? Shall we not arise and “stand in 
the gap before Him for the land, that He may 
not destroy it?” Though our “nest may be 
built on high,” and “our defense be the muni¬ 
tions of rocks,” we cannot escape, if God rise 
up against us—He can blast our prosperity— 
He can drown us in blood—He can blot out 
our existence and our name from under 
heaven. 

Let us remember, too, that not only as a 
people, but as individuals, God will deal with 
us. The day is soon coming when every man’s 
works which he wrought shall be tried as by 
fire—and we must then “eat of the fruits of 
our own ways.” 

We have exhibited fairly, but briefly, the 
nature and effects of slavery. For the truth 
of our facts, we refer to your own observa¬ 
tions; for the correctness of our reasoning, we 
appeal to your* judgments and consciences. 
What, then, must we conclude? Is slavery a 
system which Christians should sanction or 
even tolerate, if their efforts can avail to 
abolish it? The reply is often made, “God’s 
word sanctions slavery, and it cannot therefore 
be sinful. It cannot be our duty to relinquish 
our power over our slaves, or the Bible would 
have enjoined it upon us to do so.” We will 
not attempt to elaborate argument against this 
plea for slavery—it needs no such answer. 
A few observations will sflice to show its utter 
fallacy. 

We are told that the apostles gave to Chris¬ 
tian masters and Christian servants directions 
for the regulation of their mutual conduct. 
True; and these directions will be valuable 
while the world lasts—for so long, we doubt 
not, will the relation of master and servant 
exist. But how do such directions license 
holding of slaves? The terms which the 
apostles use in giving these precepts, are the 
same terms which they would have used had 
there been no slaves upon the earth. Many 
f the masters of that day were indeed slave¬ 
holders, and many of the servants were slaves 
—but should that circumstance have prevent¬ 
ed the inspire! ambassadors from teaching 

fEzekifl 22 ; 29—31. 


48 


the duties which devolved upon masters and 
servants, in every a-ge, and under every form 
of service? if so, then the fact, that rulers at 
that time were generally tyrants, and tliapeo- 
ple vassals, should have prevented them from 
laying down the duties of rulers and people. 
In the precepts of Holy Writ, neither political 
tyranny nor domestic slavery is countenanced. 
Nay, if masters complied with the apostolic 
injunction to them, and gave their servants, 
as they were directed todo, -‘that which is just 
and equal,” there would be at once an end of 
all that is properly called slavery. 

The divine right, of Kings to tyrannize over 
their subjects, and the unlawfulness of resis¬ 
tance to their authority on the part of the peo¬ 
ple, were formerly maintained by the very 
same kind of scriptural arguments which are 
now advanced in support of slavery. The ar¬ 
guments drawn from the B:ble in favor of des¬ 
potism, are indeed, much more plausible than 
those in favor of slayery. We despise the for¬ 
mer—how than should we regard the latter ? 

It. lias i-o me times been said, that the ‘New 
Testament does not condemn alaveliolding iu 
express terms.” And the practice has been 
adopted because it has not been denounc¬ 
ed. If this assertion were true, and if 
the Bible only virtually denounced it, would be 
a sin. No man can righteously contiuue a 
practice which God disapproves of, no matter 
in what form the disapproval is expressed. 
But the assertion is not true. The New Tes¬ 
tament DOES CONDEMN, SLAVEDOLDING, AS PRAC¬ 
TICED AMONG US, IN THE MOST EXPLICIT TERMS 
FURNISHED BY THE LANGUAGE IN WHICH THE 

inspired penman wrote. If a physician, af¬ 
ter a minute examination, should tell a patient, 
that his every limb and organ was diseased— 
if he should enumerate the various parts of 
his bodily system, the arms, the legs, the head, 
the stomach, the bowels, &c. and shou d say of 
each one of these parts distinctly that it was 
unsound; could the man depart, and say, ‘'Af¬ 
ter ad i am not diseased, for the physician has 
not said, in express terms , that my body is un¬ 
sound?’ Has he not received a more clear 
and express declarat ion of his entirely diseas¬ 
ed condition, than if lie had been told in mere¬ 
ly general terms, that his body was unsound? 
Thus has God condemned slavery. He has 
specified the parts which compose it, and de¬ 
nounced them, ono by one, in the most ample 
and unequivocal form. In the English langu¬ 
age we have the term servant , which we apply 
indiscriminately both to those held in volunta¬ 
ry subjection to another, and to those whose 
subjection is involuntary. We have also the 
term slave , which is applicable exclusively to 
those held in involuntary subjection. The 
Greek language had a word corresponding ex¬ 
actly, insignification, with our word servant.; 
but it had none that answered precisely to our 
term slave.* How then was an apostle, wri¬ 
ting in Greek, to condemn our slavery ? Could 
it be done in the way in which some seem to 
think it must be done before they will be con¬ 


vinced of its sinfulness ? How can we expect to 
find in Scripture the words “slavery is sinful,” 
when the language in which it is written con¬ 
tained no term which expressed the meaning 
of our word slavery ? Would the advocates of 
slavery wish us to show that the apostles de¬ 
clare it to be unchristian to hold servants 
(douloi)? This would hav^e been denouncing, 
as criminal, practices far different from slave¬ 
holding. But inspiration taught the holy pen¬ 
men the only correct and efficacious method of 
conveying their condemnation of this unchris¬ 
tian system. They pronounce of each one of 
those several things which constitute slavery, 
that it is sinful—thus clearly and forever de¬ 
nouncing the system, wherever it might ap¬ 
pear, and whatever name it. might assume. If 
a writer should take up each part of our fed¬ 
eral constitution separately and condemn it 
article by article, who would have the folly to 
assert that, after all, he had not expressly con¬ 
demned the constitution? Who would say 
that this thorough and entire disupproval of 
every part of the instrument of confederation 
rau-t pass for nothing, and is no proof of the 
writer’s hostility to it, because he has never 
said exactly in so many words, “I disapprove 
of the constitution of the United States? We 
see that he could condemn it most explicitly 
and thoroughly without even mentioning it by 
name. 

Further, human language is so fluctuating 
that words often, in the lapse of time, change 
their meaning. The word tyrant expresses 
now a very different idea from that which it 
once conveyed. So the term constitution of 
the United States, at some future period, from 
the alterations introduced into our govern¬ 
ment, may indicate something far different 
from that which it now indicates. It is true 
wisdom, then, when we wish to perpetuate our 
condemnation of a system or institution, to 
express our sentiments of the various things 
that constitute the system or institution, and 
not of the mere name by which it is now known. 

Thus our sentiments will be guarded from 
the misconceptions that may arise in the fluc¬ 
tuation of language. So that even if there 
were words in Greek, specifically set apart to 
designate the idea of slavery, inspiration would 
probably still have guided the apostles to their 
present form of expression in its condemna¬ 
tion. Had they used such language as this, 
“slavery is sinful,” some modern apologist for 
the system might have alleged that our slave¬ 
ry was not such as existed among the Greeks 
—that slavery here was a different thing from 
that which the apostles denounced. But the 
course they pursued leaves no room for such a 

# The words oiketes andrapoden, are those which most 
nearly correspond, in the idea which they present, 
with our word slave. But oiketes properly signifies a 
domestic ; and andrapoden, one taken and enslaved in war. 
The inspired writers could not have denounced our sort 
of slavery, by using either of these words. If they had 
forbidden us the use of all domestics—if they had for¬ 
bidden us to to hold andrapoda, they might have been 
interpreted as forbidding our use only of such slaves as 
have been taken and enslaved in war. 


49 


subterfuge. We have received the command, 
“Love thy neighbor as thyself,” and we are 
conscious that we are violating the whole 
spirit as well as letter of this precept, when, 
for our own trifling pecuniary gain, we keep a 
whole race sunk in ignorance and pain. We 
are commanded to give our servants “that 
which is just and equal,” and no sophistry can 
persuade us that we fulfil this toward those 
whom we deprive of the reward of their labor. 
We know that the idea of a bondman receiv¬ 
ing a just and equal remuneration for his la¬ 
bor, never enters the minds of slaveholders. 
The precepts against fraud, oppression, pride 
and cruelty, all cut directly through the heart 
of the slave system. Look back at the consti¬ 
tuents and the effects of slavery, and ask your¬ 
selves, “Is not every one of these things di¬ 
rectly at variance with the plainest commands 
of the gospel?” The maintenance of this 
system breaks not one law of the Lord, or two 
laws—it violates the whole code—it leaves 
scarcely one precept unbroken. And will any 
one, then, contend that slavery is not repro¬ 
bated by God, and that he may participate in 
the system, and assist in its perpetuation, 
without deep criminality? Forbid it, con¬ 
science—forbid it, common sense ! Gaming, 
horse-racing, gladiatorial shows in which 
men were hired to butcher each other, the 
selling of children by their parents, which 
was often practised in ancient days—all these 
things are condemned by the Scriptures, not 
by name, but (as slavery is condemned) by 
denouncing those crimes of which these acts 
are modifications and illustrations. 

These views of the sinfulness of slavery 
place it beyond all doubt, that it is the duty 
of every individual connected with the system 
to aid, vigorously and efficiently, in its aboli¬ 
tion, and thus free himself from all participa¬ 
tion in its criminality. How is this to be done? 
Certainly not by merely treating our slaves 
kindly, and thus mitigating the evils of their 
condition. You may say you have already, 
in the case of your own slaves, abolished the 
worst evils of the system, and that in every 
way you promote their comfort and welfare. 
Still, duty absolutely requires at least one 
more step—a guarantee that their future hap¬ 
piness, and that of their children, shall not be 
at the mercy of another’s caprice. And this 
can be effected only by a legal provision for 
their release from bondage. It is probable 
that the Romans were in a better condition 
under Titus, than they would have been had 
they governed themselves. But the gentleness 
of his sway only aggravated the horrors of 
their situation, under his dark and bloody 
successors. Granting all that any man may 
urge in favor of his own kindness to his de¬ 
pendents, still he is, contrary to the laws of 
nature and of God, retaining them in a condi¬ 
tion, which is tolerable only under the most 
rare and favorable circumstances—which in¬ 
evitably works woe and ruin, unless prevent¬ 
ed by the singular virtue and generosity of 


an extraordinary master. Would we be will¬ 
ing that we and our children should be thus 
held? And remember that the fundamental 
principle of Christian morality is, that “what 
thiugs soever ye would that others should do 
unto you, do ye even so to them.” Are we 
complying with our Saviour’s injunction, 
when we thus leave our fellow-beings exposed 
to all the future miseries, which avarice, ca¬ 
price and cruelty may inflict? Yet we pro¬ 
fess subjection to Christ’s laws—“He that 
knoweth my will and doeth it,” says the divine 
Redeemer, “he it is that loveth me.” The very 
best condition of a slave for life, is like the 
condition of those unfortunate men that we 
sometimes read of, who have been unjustly 
condemned to die—but mercy or policy arrest¬ 
ing the execution of the sentence, they have, 
for a time, been permitted to go at large, yet 
liable at every moment to be remanded to 
prison and to death. This is the situation of 
a slave, at his best estate—and who will say 
that either justice or mercy permits us to re¬ 
tain him in such a situation ? 

It is often urged that our slaves are better 
off than our free negroes. If mankind had 
considered this plea for continuing to hold 
slaves a valid one, the whole world would have 
been still in slavery—for all nations have 
been at one time or other in some kind of 
slavery—and all despots urged this plea 
against their emancipation. Besides, no man. 
ought to urge this as his reason for retaining 
his bondmen, unless he feels conscious that it 
is his real motive. And we willingly appeal 
to every man’s conscience to say, whether his 
own imagined interest is not his real motive 
for refusing to adopt any efficient measures 
for changing the condition of his servants. 
That our negroes, if emancipated, will be 
worse off, is, we feel, but the specious pretext 
for lulling our own pangs of conscience, and 
answering the argument of the philanthro¬ 
pist. None of us believe that God has so cre¬ 
ated a whole race, that it is better for them to 
remain in perpetual bondage. One mode of 
emancipation may be preferable to another-i- 
but any mode is preferable to the perpetuation, 
through generations to come, of a degrading 
bondage. History, with a hundred tongues, 
testifies that, as a general rule, to emancipate 
is to elevate. And it is vain for any man to 
argue against such a general law of nature by 
adducing the occasional departures, which 
have fallen under his own personal observa¬ 
tion. We plant ourselves down on the broad 
and acknowledged principle, that God created 
all men capable of freedom—if, then, they 
have become unfit for this condition, it is by 
our fault they have become so; and our exer¬ 
tions, if we are willing to do our duty, can 
easily restore to them that fitness oi which we 
have deprived them. 

As the conclusion of all that has been ad¬ 
vanced, we assert it to be the unquestionable 
duty of every Christian, to use vigorous and 
immediate measures for the destruction of the. 


50 


whole system, and for the removal of all its 
unhappy effects. Both these objects should be 
contemplated in his efforts. 

No plan of emancipation can be proposed, to 
which we may not find objections. Difficul¬ 
ties environ us. Our position is unnatural, 
and we can neither retain it nor recede from 
it, without suffering and inflicting evils, and 
the man who will not emancipate, until he can 
see a plan which will secure the happiness of 
himself and his slaves, without effort and 
without inconvenience, will have to wait until 
the trumpet of the archangel shall summon 
the slave and his master before the dread tri¬ 
bunal of their common Lord. He who will not 
move in this work, because he can see no plan 
unattended with some evils and some sacrifice, 
is like one who having wandered into the 
depths of a swamp, determines to remain 
there, because he can see no way of escape in 
which he will not encounter thorns and quag¬ 
mires to obstruct and annoy him. 

What, then, is the wisest plan we can adopt 
for effecting this work of duty ? The most 
simple is that of abolition, or immediate and 
complete emancipation. Many considerations, 
however, induce in us the belief, that this is 
not the best plan which might be presented to 
you for general adoption. It is, doubtless, 
preferable to perpetuating the bondage of 
your slaves. So, too, in the political world, a 
revolution, with all its consequences, is prefer¬ 
able to a perpetuation of tyranny; yet cer¬ 
tainly a safe and rapid political reformation 
is, in all practical cases, the dictate of both 
humanity and policy. There are, we doubt 
not, many cases in which the condition and 
character of particular slaves, render their 
immediate emancipation the master’s duty. 
But those who conceive that immediate eman¬ 
cipation is, in all cases, a duty, do not reflect 
upon the circumstances in which we are 
placed. They argue as if we had a system of 
laws, devised in reference to the peculiar 
character and condition of emancipated 
blacks, and adapted both to exercise over 
them a salutary and necessary restraint, and 
also to secure their intellectual and moral im¬ 
provement. If the political community in 
which we live would enact such laws, then the 
case which they imagine might be realized, 
and our duty might be different from what it 
now is. At present, an emancipated black 
among us is placed in peculiarly unpropitious 
circumstances. His situation is surrounded 
by difficulties and temptations, and no pro¬ 
vision is made to secure him against them, or 
to promote either his own intellectual and 
moral culture, or that of his offspring. We 
cannot, then, place our slave undergthe re¬ 
straint and protection of peculiar laws, which 
would, as far as might be practicable, guaran¬ 
tee his safety and advancement. We have no 
legal system which might be a kind of Mosaic 
dispensation to our slaves, preparing them for 
the clearer light and higher privileges of a 
more glorious economy, where they would be 


admitted to that full liberty, wherewith God, 
in his providence, has made us free. We, as 
individuals, are shut up to the alternative of 
giving our slaves unrestrained self-control, or 
retaining, for a time, our legal authority over 
them. The fact that our power is greater than 
should have ever been entrusted to masters, is 
no sufficient reason for a conscientious man’s 
immediate relinquishment of his only title to 
exercise that portion of authority, which he is 
fully persuaded, is necessary to be continued, 
for a time, for the good of those over whom it 
extends. 

The plan, then, which we propose, is, for the 
master to retain, during a limited period, and 
with a regard to the real welfare of the slave, 
that authority which he before held in perpe¬ 
tuity, and solely for his own interest. Let the 
full future liberty of the slave be secured 
against all contingences, by a recorded deed 
of emancipation, to take effect at a specified 
time. In the meanwhile, let the servant be 
treated with kindness—let all those things 
which degrade him be removed—let him en¬ 
joy means of instruction—let his moral and 
religious improvement besought—let his pros¬ 
pects be presented before him, to stimulate 
him to acquire those habits of foresight, econ¬ 
omy, industry, activity, skill and integrity, 
which will fit him for using well the liberty 
he is soon to enjoy. That master is, in our 
opinion, doing most for the destruction of this 
system, who thus sets in operation a machine¬ 
ry which, in a given and limited period, will 
not only unbind the body of the slave, but will 
link by link, and in the only way in which it 
can be effected, twist off the fetters that now 
cramp his soul. If the master retains his au¬ 
thority over his servants only for a time, that 
he may enjoy ampler opportunities of em¬ 
ploying means for their amendment and ele¬ 
vation—if he regard them as a trust commit¬ 
ted to him by his Master and theirs for their 
mutual benefit, and no longer as property of 
which he has the uncontrolled disposal, for 
his own selfish ends—if he acts and feels 
thus, he is not only free from guilt, but he is 
“bringing forth fruits meets for repentance” 
—he is doing a work of righteousness and hu¬ 
manity. If it be pretended that such a man 
is sinning, it must be on one or the other of 
these grounds—either he is doiDg harm to his 
own servant by his course, or he is injuring 
others by countenancing the oppressive and 
cruel system of slavery. But neither of these 
allegations would be correct. Will any sober 
man, acquainted with the ordinary character 
of slaves, assert that it would be doing them 
an injury to deny them, for a time, the exer¬ 
cise of unlimited self-control? Will he as¬ 
sert, that the authority of a conscientious and 
kind benefactor extending over them, for a 
time, to assist them in the attainment of cor¬ 
rect sentiments, useful knowledge, and virtu¬ 
ous habits—restraining them from vice, shield¬ 
ing them from temptation and moulding them 
to rectitude —will he assert that such authori- 


51 


ty is doing harm ? Why is it that wisdom and 
benevolence have fixed upon twenty-one as 
the age at which our children are to become 
their own masters? Why are they not freed 
from parental control at seventeen or eigh¬ 
teen ? Simply because, as a general rule, 
they are not fit for self-government at eigh¬ 
teen. They are, therefore, kept under au¬ 
thority for three years longer—and not only 
no harm, but even a kindness is done to them. 
The almost unanimous voice of mankind pro¬ 
nounces that this is right. Now, it is well 
known that the great mass of slaves are mere 
children in understanding and knowledge. 
The white youth at eighteen usually far sur¬ 
passes the great mass of our slaves in intelli¬ 
gence and capacity of managing successfully 
his own afiFars. If, then, we grant it to be 
right to retain the one, for a few years, to 
qualify him for his future condition, why is it 
not right to do the same in the case of the 
other? We love our children, and do for 
them that which we think will benefit them— 
why should we not confer the same benefit on 
the slave? Is a course which is kindness to a 
child, injustice and oppression to a slave? The 
voice of enthusiasm may declare against us— 
but the voice of sober reason will pronounce 
in our favor. 

Neither is it true, that the gradualemancipa- 
tor sins by his countenancing others in hold¬ 
ing slaves. His example cannot be appealed 
to by slaveholders as a justification of their 
course. His system is as different from theirs 
as benevolence is from injustice. Let him do 
as he does, and slavery at once ceases. He 
has, by his deed of emancipation, recorded his 
detestation of theii system, and shown that 
he will sacrifice his gains to his abhorrence of 
it. But it is asked, what difference is there in 
principle, between his holding them for some 
years and their holding them for life? The 
difference in principle is the same that exists 
between guardianship aud slavery, or between 
ordinary apprenticeship and slavery. If it 
were sinful to do anything which may be mis¬ 
interpreted into an encouragement of slavery, 
it would then be wrong to use the products of 
slave labor, to associate with slave proprie¬ 
tors, and to do a thousand other acts which 
may be said to be a countenancing of this un¬ 
just system. 

It is also a matter worthy of the serious 
consideration of a benevolent mind, whether 
by a hasty emancipation, he may not be rivet¬ 
ing more firmly the chains of other slaves. 
The strongest and most frequent argument in 
the mouth of the advocate of slavery is, the 
worthlessness of the free blacks. This argu¬ 
ment is, it is true, sophistical—but its force is 
accumulated by every case of emancipation, 
when the subsequent conduct of the black is 
at war with his own interest, and the welfare 
of the community. If, then, we do not use a 
reasonable prudence, and secure, as far as 
may be possible, the future good conduct of 


those whom we make free, we may be found 
among the number of those whose well-meant 
but misguided zeal retards the work they aim 
to advance. 

We have thus sketched a general outline of 
the plan which we propose for your adoption; 
and have endeavored to show that the princi¬ 
ples on which it is based, are the principles of 
truth and righteousness. We have no hesita¬ 
tion in saying that this plan, in its general 
featui-es, should be adopted and acted on by 
all. In carrying it out into its minute de¬ 
tails, many cases of doubt and difficulty will 
arise, both as to the precise period for emanci¬ 
pating particular slaves, and as to the means 
to be used for their adequate preparation. 
But every one who cherishes Christian ben¬ 
evolence, and strives to keep an honest con¬ 
science, will be able, by applying the princi¬ 
ples laid down, to ascertain the specific course 
which is duty, in his own individual case. 
These cases of difficulty can, however, occur 
only in respect to the slaves who are already 
advanced in years, and whose habits are fixed; 
in relation to the young, our course is plain 
and unembarrassed. In view, then, of these 
circumstances, we leave many things to pri¬ 
vate judgment, and confine ourselves to a few 
specifications as exhibiting what is the clear 
and unquestionable duty of all. 

1. We would recommend that all slaves now 
under twenty years of age, and all those yet 
to be born in our possession, be emancipated, 
as they severally reach their twenty-fifth 
year. 

2. We recommend that deeds of emancipa¬ 
tion be now drawn up, and recorded in our re¬ 
spective county courts, specifying the jslaves 
we are about to emancipate, and the age at 
which each is to become free. 

This measure is highly necessary, as it will 
furnish to our own minds, to the world, and to 
our slaves, satisfactory proof of our sincerity 
in this work; aud it will also secure the lib¬ 
erty of the slave against all contingencies. 

3. We recommend that our slaves be in¬ 
structed in the common elementary branches 
of education. 

4. We recommend that strenuous and per¬ 
severing efforts be made to induce them to at¬ 
tend regularly upon the ordinary services of 
religion, both domestic and public. 

5. We recommend that great pains be taken 
to teach them the Holy Scriptures; and that to 
effect this, the instrumentality of Sabbath 
schools, wherever they can be enjoyed, be 
united with that of domestic instruction. 

These are measures which all ought to 
adopt; and we know of no peculiaidty of cir¬ 
cumstances in the case of any individual, 
which can free him from culpability if he 
neglects them. There are, indeeed, various 
other means, which we might suggest, for im¬ 
proving the moral and intellectual condition 
of our blacks ; but they are such as we cannot 
press upon you as matters of absolute duty, 


52 


since combinations of circumstances may, in 
the cases of some individuals, make them im¬ 
practicable. Our ministers of the gospel, for 
example, might greatly aid this cause, by 
preaching at certain stated times to the blacks. 
Perhaps the afternoon of every alternate Sab¬ 
bath could not, usually, be better employed 
than by devoting it to such a service. Much 
more religious instruction would be conveyed 
to them by sermons specially adapted to their 
capacities—a much larger number would at¬ 
tend on such occasions—many would thus be 
induced to attend the ordinances of public 
worship, at other times, who now are never 
seen at the house of God—and there would be 
a manifestation to the community, that we 
really believe the souls of the blacks to be im¬ 
perishable and invaluable. 

In many of our congregations there are a 
sufficient number of pious masters to enable 
them, easily and at a small expense, to have 
the young whom they intend to emancipate, 
taught, during the winter months, by a hired 
teacher. 

There are many families in which the younger 
white members could be easily induced to pur¬ 
sue a systematic course of imparting instruc¬ 
tion to the black, and thus communicate to 
them, in a few years, far more than the bare 
elements of learning. Sabbath schools for 
the blacks ought to be ganiorzed in nearly all 
our congregations. 

All these and many more such measures 
have been successfully adopted in some places 
and by some individuals.- There are many 
others who might pursue them with equal suc¬ 
cess. 

Brethren, there are three courses before 
you, one of which you must choose: either to 
emancipate immediately and without prepara¬ 
tion, or to pursue some such plan of gradual 
emancipation as we propose, or to continue to 
lend your example and influence to perpetuate 
slavery. It is improbable that you will adopt 
the first course—if, then, you refuse to con¬ 
cur in the plan of gradual emancipation, and 
act upon it, however you may lull conscience, 
you are lending your aid to perpetuate a de¬ 
moralizing and cruel system, which it would 
be an insult to God to imagine that he does 
not abhor—a system which exhibits power 
without resposibility, toil without recompense, 
life without liberty, law without justice, wrongs 
without redress, infamy without crime, pun¬ 
ishment without guilt, and families without 
marriage—a system which will not only make 
victims of the present unhappy generation, 
inflicting upon them the degradation, the con¬ 
tempt, the lassitude, and the anguish of hope¬ 
less oppression, but which even aims at trans¬ 
mitting this heritage of injury and woe to 
their children, and their children’s children, 
down to their latest posterity. Can any 
Christian contemplate, without trembling, his 
own agency in the perpetuation of such a sys¬ 


tem? And what will be the end of these 
scenes of misery and vice? Shall we wait 
until worldly politicians and legislators may 
rise up and bid them cease? We will wait in 
vain. Already have we heard the sentiment 
proclaimed from high places, and by the voice 
of authority, that a race of slaves is necessary 
to the existence of freedom. Is it from those 
who utter such sentiments, that we expect de¬ 
liverance to come? No. Reformation must 
commence, where we are divinely taught that 
“judgment must begin, at tha house of Ood 
This work must v e done; and Christians must 
begin it, and begin it soon, or wrath will come 
upon us. The groans of millions do not rise 
forever unheard, before the throne of the Al¬ 
mighty. The hour of doom must soon arrive 
—the storm must soon gather—the bolt of de¬ 
struction must soon be hurled—and the guilty 
must soon be dashed in pieces. The voice of 
past history, and the voice of inspiration, both 
warn us that the catastrophe must come, un¬ 
less averted by repentance. And let us re¬ 
member that we are each of us individually 
responsible. We are individually assisting to 
pile up this mountain of guilt. And even if 
temporal judgments do not fall upon our day, 
we are not on that account the more safe from 
punishment. If we “know our Lord’s will, 
and do it not, we shall be beaten with many 
stripes.” The sophistry and false reasoning 
by which we may delude our own souls, will 
not blind the eyes “which are as a flame of 
fire.” A few years, at most, will place us 
where we would gladly give all the slaves of 
a universe, to buy off the punishment that op¬ 
pression brings down upon the soul. It may 
be difficult to stand in the judgment without 
having done it. 

Brethren, we have done. The hour is com¬ 
ing in which the slave and his master must 
stand together before the tribunal of God—a 
God who judges righteously. Are you pre¬ 
pared to place yourselves before him who will 
decide upon your eternal destiny, and say 
you have done justice to those whom you now 
hold in bondage? Are you prepared to say, “As 
I have done unto these, so let it be done unto 
me—as I have shown mercy, so let me receive 
mercy at the hands of my judge?” Antici¬ 
pate, we beseech you, the feelings and decision 
of that great day which is fast hastening on; 
try yourselves now, as God will then try you. 
“What doth the Lord require of thee, but to 
do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly 
with your God?” Are you “doing justly,” 
while you retain your fellow-men in hopeless 
bondage? Are you “loving mercy,” while you 
are supporting a system that degrades and 
brutalizes beings whom God created in His 
own image ? These are solemn questions. 
Let reason answer them ; and let conscience 
devise your future course. 

John Brown, Esq., Chairman. 

John C. Young, Secretary. 



53 


III. SYNOD OF KENTUCKY. action of ths General Assembly, which the 

. 0 , „ Synod judges to be repugnant to the Word of 

^ As the various deliverances of the Synod of God, as that Word is interpreted in our Con- 
Kentucky, during the past six years, have fession of Faith. 

(2.) The sehism which followed the action of 
the Assembly. 

This Synod deplores the schism, which has 
occurred in those States in which, as before 
said, it was impossible for the Presbyterian 
people to keep the day of prayer ordered by 
the Assembly. While, in this deplorable 
schism, this Synod sees a sad proof of the 
want of wisdom in that action of the Assem¬ 
bly, which has been a chief pretext of it, it 
decidedly condemns the schism itself, as be¬ 
ing without sufficient justification, and in its 
results, portentious of incalculable evil. And 
as concerning the posture of the Synod, it 
seems timely to declare, that it adheres with 
unbroken purpose to the Presbyterian Church 
in the United States of America; and hereby 
enjoins upon all its members, and upon all 
under its control and care, to avoid all divis¬ 
ive and schismatical courses, to cultivate the 
peace of the Church, and to practice great mu¬ 
tual forbearance. 


been almost or quite as much misunderstood 
and misrepresented as those of the Assembly, 
and as they are made to play a conspicuous 
part in all the controversy now going on, we 
propose to present them here entire. First 
in order is the 

Paper adopted by Synod at Harrodsburg, in 

in 1861, on the Minutes of the Assembly , and 

which is as follows : 

The committee* on the Minutes of the As¬ 
sembly presented their report, which was re¬ 
ceived, amended, approved, and is as follows: 

The Committee on the Minutes of the As¬ 
sembly of 1861, upon the best consideration 
they have been able to give to the contents of 
those Minutes, and of the unhappy condition 
of the Church, at the present moment—and 
of the perils which threaten the cause of 
Christ, in the bounds of this Synod, submit 
the following minute to the consideration of 
Synod. 

(1.) The action of the Assembly concerning a 
day of general prayer. 

This Synod deeply regrets that part of the 
action of the last Assembly, touching the or¬ 
der for a day of general prayer, which was 
liable to be construed, and was construed, into 
a requisition on all the members and office¬ 
bearers of the Church, living in the numer¬ 
ous States which had seceded from the United 
States and were in a State of war with them, 
as bound by Christian duty, and by the au¬ 
thority of the Church, to disregard the hostile 
governments which had been established over 
them, and, in defiance of the actual authority 
of those governments, to pray for their over¬ 
throw. In the judgment of a large minority 
of the Assembly, and of multitudes in the 
Church, the subject-matter of the action of the 
Assembly, in the premises, being purely polit¬ 
ical, was incompetent to a spiritual court. 

Undoubtedly It was incompetent to the As¬ 
sembly, as a spiritual court, to require or to 
advise acts of disobedience to actual govern¬ 
ments, by those under the power of those gov¬ 
ernments—in the manner and under the cir¬ 
cumstances which existed; and still further, it 
was neither wise nor discreet, for the Assem¬ 
bly of the whole Church to disregard, in its 
action, the difficulties and dangers, which 
rendered it impossible for large portions of 
the Church to obey its order, without be¬ 
ing liable to the highest penalties. The 
action of the Assembly being exhaust¬ 
ed by the occurrence of the day of prayer part of a single act , viz: that of 1861. In 
recommended, and no ulterior proceedings un- re p|y t 0 this charge, Rev. Dr. E. P. Hura- 
der the order of the Assembly being contem- r 47 ... , . 

plated; this Synod contents itself with this phrey said, m the western Presbyterian , 
expression of its grave disapprobation of this June 14: 


(3.) The causes of Domestic Missions and Ben¬ 
eficiary Education in the bounds of this Synod. 

In the actual state of affairs, and until the 
present evil times are overpast, the Synod, 
without affecting its permanent relations to 
the Boards, advises the Presbyteries under its 
care, to take charge of the cause of Domestic 
Missions and the cause of Education, as re¬ 
lated to the cases of beneficiary candidates for 
the ministry, in their bounds respectively. 
Let funds be collected and disbursed through 
the action of the Presbyteries respectively, for 
the greatest benefit, according to their judg¬ 
ment, of the Missionary and Education causes, 
within the bounds of this Synod. And the 
Synod exhorts the Presbyteries to increased 
liberality to both of these great and suffering 
causes; so that, in these sad times, the gospel 
may be more and more widely preached among 
the destitute in our bounds; and so that in¬ 
creased liberality may be extended to the sup¬ 
port of indigent youth seeking the ministry 
amongst us 

*The committee were, R. J. Breckinridge, Chair¬ 
man, W. C. Matthews, R. W. Landis, 0. Beatty, J. C. 
Mai well. 

It has been affirmed again and again, that 
those who voted for the above paper, and yet 
adhere to the Assembly, are inconsistent. It 
is constantly asserted that they voted the As¬ 
sembly u acts" to be “repugnant to the Word 
of God,’’ whereas this paper refers only to one 



54 


“Dr. Robinson charges me, or at least the 
brethren with whom I act, with having for 
years pretended to hold the acts of the As¬ 
sembly to be repugnant to the word of God, 
and at the same time with having used every 
art to put the yoke on the necks of the Chris¬ 
tie n people of Kentucky. In reply to this, I 
say, first, that I have never said that the 
“acts” of the Assembly were repugnant to 
God’s word—but one act only out of five— 
that of 1861.” 

The Assembly’s act of 1861, is embodied 
mainly in two resolutions. The first appoints 
a day of prayer, to be observed throughout 
the bounds of the Church; “to seek God’s 
guidance and blessing upon our rulers, and 
their counsels, as well as on the Congress of 
the United States about to assemble; and to 
implore Him in the name of Jesus Christ, to 
restore to us the blessings of an honorable 
peace.” The second acknowledges “our obli¬ 
gations to promote and perpetuate, as far as 
in us lies, the integrity of these United States, 
and to uphold the Federal Government.” 

In regard to the action of the Synod of 
Kentucky. The first thing to be noted is that 
it has reference exclusively to that part of the 
Assembly’s deliverance appointing a day of 
general prayer. A glance at the Synod's min¬ 
utes, as quoted above, will show this. The 
point of its condemation lies against the As¬ 
sembly's advising “disobedience to actual gov¬ 
ernments, by those under the power of those 
governments” And it is this action of the 
Assembly which “the Synod judges to be re¬ 
pugnant to the word of God.” Upon this we 
have two remarks to make : First, it is more 
than doubtful, we think, whether the Assem¬ 
bly intended its action to be so interpreted as 
to require of any under its care, “disobedi¬ 
ence to actual governments” over them. Sec¬ 
ondly, the very next Assembly’s action on the 
state of the country, formally and expressly 
disavowed any such authority. This is its lan¬ 
guage: “On the contrary, every follower of 
Christ has the personal liberty bestowed on 
him by Christ, to submit, for the sake of 
Christ, according to his own cons ientious 
sense of duty, to whatever government , however 
bad, under which his lot may be cast.” [See 
minutes of 1862, p. 625.] It is very gener¬ 
ally known that the papers quoted above— 
that of the Synod of Kentucky, and the As¬ 
sembly of 1862—were drawn by the same 
hand. It wai natural to expect, therefore, 
that what was condemned by the Synod of 
Kentucky, in October, 1861, should be disa¬ 
vowed by the Assembly in May, 1862. What 
we think will appear from ■this comparison of 
these important papers, amounts to this : that 
every point of the Assembly’s act of ’61, in¬ 
volving fundamental principles, condemned 
by the protest of Dr. Hodge and others, and 
by the Synod oD Kentucky, has been solemnly 
denied by that Assembly as belonging legiti¬ 
mately to its action, or solemnly disavowed by 
the succeeding Assembly, as expressing the 


settled and deliberate judgment of the Church. 
And further, that the grand principle, touch¬ 
ing the authority of the Church to teach men their 
duty to the civil powers, was assented to, by Dr. 
Hodge, by the Synod of Kentucky through its 
entire delegation in the Assembly of ’61. and 
by the whole Southern Church so far as repre¬ 
sented in that body. 

The next meeting of Synod was held at 
Paris, in May, 1863. The Committee on 
the Minutes of the Assembly consisted of the 
following persons: 

R. J. Breckinridge, J. T. Lapsley, J. D. 
Matthews, J. S. Hays, N. Rue. 

The Committee on the Minutes of the As¬ 
sembly presented their report, which was 
unanimously adopted. It is as follows: 

The Committee of Synod on the Minutes of 
the General Assembly, of 1863, submit, as 
their report, the following minute, as proper 
to be adopted by Synod. 

If this Synod had been constituted, accord¬ 
ing to its adjournment in 1861, early in Octo¬ 
ber, 1862—which was prevented by the occu¬ 
pation of the State of Kentucky by a hostile 
army—there were, no doubt, amongst the im¬ 
portant matters contained in the minutes of 
the General Assembly of 1862, several, which 
it would have been proper for this Synod, per¬ 
haps its duty, to have made subject of special 
action. The greater part of these topics, in 
their present posture, and in that of this 
Synod to them, and considering, that the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly of 1863 will convene within 
the present month, does not appear to demand 
any particular action of this Synod, in that 
aspect of them, at this time. 

There is, however, one deliverence of the 
Assembly of 1862, namely, that on the state of 
the Church and the country , with regard to 
which the Synod cannot, with propriety, re¬ 
main wholly silent. The posture of this gen¬ 
eral matter, and of the Church in the bounds 
of this Synod, is this: its congregations, its 
Presbyteries, and this Synod, are, more or 
less, divided in sentiment. Its Presbyteries 
have, to a certain extent, perhaps generally, 
made deliverances on the subject. These de¬ 
liverances have not yet received the special 
attention of Synod, by way of review The 
Synod itself made a deliverance in October, 
1861, which the General Assembly of 1862 dis¬ 
approved, in part, by way of review; and the 
General Assembly of 1861 made a deliverance, 
and the General Assembly of 1862 a still more 
formal and extended one. Under all these 
circumstance, the most proper course for this 
Synod to take, at its present sessions, with 
reference to the action of the Assembly, 
seems to be to content itself with the preced¬ 
ing statements; to reserve, until its regular 
meeting in October next, the consideration of 
any further decisive action, on the general 
subject it may be its duty to take. 

In the meantime, the Synod solemnly re- 


55 


minds all under its care and authority, and 
especially all office-bearers of the Church, that 
it is their special duty, at this time, to watch 
over the purity and peace of the Church; that 
it is the special duty of this Synod to take 
care that they do this faithfully. 

Action of Synod in 1864, at Danville. 

Tlio Committee on the minutes of the As¬ 
sembly, of which Dr. Humphery was chair, 
man, presented a majority and minority re¬ 
port; various substitutes were offered for 
both there papers. At length, after a debate 
of unusual ability and interest the following 
paper was adopted, on which the yeas and 
nays are recorded. 

The General Assembly, at different times, 
but especially the years 1818 and 1845, set 
forth the opinions and views of the Presbyte¬ 
rian Church of the United States on the subject 
of slavery. By these deliverances, this Synod 
was willing and is still willing to abide, and 
any further or different utterance on that sub¬ 
ject by the last General Assembly, was, in the 
judgment of this Synod, unnecessary, unwise 
and untimely— unnecessary , because the former 
deliverances were sufficiently expressive of the 
views of the Church, and had been acquiesced 
in with great unanimity for many years ; un¬ 
wise, because the whole country was excited 
upon the subject of slavery, and the means 
adopted by the President of the United States 
for its destruction, in regard to which there 
was great division of sentiment in the public 
mind, and the Assembly could not take any 
action on the subject without at least seeming 
to cast its influence, with one or the other of 
the political parties, which divided the coun¬ 
try. Moreover, the Minute of the Assembly 
was peculiarly liable to this imputation, be¬ 
cause in the latter part of this some of its ex¬ 
pressions may be misunderstood, and others 
may be taken in the sense of a political, if not 
a partisan statement. The action of the As¬ 
sembly was untimely , because times of high 
political excitement are not proper occasions 
for the ecclesiastical courts to express opinions 
upon the topics which constitute the party is¬ 
sues of the day. The mission of the Church of 
Christ is spiritual, and any interference with 
matters purely political is a departure from 
her duty, and without the pale of her authori¬ 
ty, as conferred upon her by her Divene Head. 

Whilst expressing these views, the Synod 
deems it timely again to declare that it ad¬ 
heres with unbroken purpose to the Presbyte¬ 
rian Church of the United States of America, 
and hereby enjoins on all its members and up¬ 
on all under its control and care to avoid all 
divisive and schismatical courses, to cultivate 
the peace of the Church, and to practice great 
mutual forbearance. 

The vote was taken by yeas and nays, and 
resulted as follows : Yeas, 49 ; nays, 38. 


Yeas.—H. R. Tunstall, D. It. Jones, C. A. 
Preston, J. P. Hendrick, R. F. Caldwell, W. 
Riley, L. L. Warren, W. L. Breckinridg J. P. 
McMillan, J. L. McKee, M. G. Knight, R. Val¬ 
entine, W. C. Matthews, S. Williams, W. W. 
Hill, F. Bush, S C. Bull, R. P. Kenny, S R. 
Williams, J. S. Hays, J. K. Lyle, S. M. Bay less, 

S. Yerkes, R. Miller, L. Landram, 0. Beatty, 

R. Russel, W. Sampson, J. Wilson, G. Dennv, 
W. D. Symington, G. J. Reid, J. Barnes, J. 
Cooper, J. T. Lapsley, H. II. Allen, W. J. Mc- 
Knight, Jas. Matthews, W. H Honnell, J. S. 
Braddock, T. H. Cleland, E. P. Humphrey, W. 

S. Doak, J. A. Bogle, E. Forman, S. B, Cheek, 

S. S. McRoberts, R. A. Johnston, A. A. Hogue 
—49. 

Nays.—Dr. McGoodwin, T. H. Urmston, D. 
0. Daviess, H. M. Scudder, R. L. Breck, J. 
Gault, M. Hardin, J. C. Brown, G. Bergen, W. 
Prather, W. T. McElroy, W. L. Nourse, E. 
Wurts, R. Morrison, J. N. Sanders, W. H. 
Crookes, W. Allen, T. A. Bracken, D. P. Young 
M. Van Lear, R. Douglass, F. G. Strahan, J. 
D. Matthews, W H. Forsythe, S. V. Rowland, 
J. Moore, C. A. Griffin, W. II. McAfee, J. B. 
Hughes, C. T. Armstrong, J. B. Green, A I. 
McMurdy, J. Paxton, G. 0. Barnes, R. L. Stan¬ 
ton, J. J. Cook, M. Sanders, J. V. Logan—38. 

Action of Synod in 1865, at Louisville. 

This paper, like that of the previous year, 
was adopted after long discussion. Both of 
them were presented by the late Judge Wil¬ 
liam Sampson, Chief Justice of the Court of 
Appeals of Kentucky. As a matter of inter 
est to many, we subjoin the recorded votes in 
the adoption of this paper. The subsequent 
course of some will appear strange upon such 
a vote. 

Accordingly the paper offered by Judge 
Sampson was taken up. It was considered 
item by item. It is as follows : 

“This Synod, in the exercise of that freedom 
with which Christ makes his people free, in 
the spirit of loyalty to the Head of the Church, 
and of respect to those who are over us in the 
Lord, makes the following deliverance, touch¬ 
ing some of the recent acts of the General As¬ 
sembly, and in regard to the late act of the 
Presbytery of Louisville, adopting a paper, 
called the ‘Declaration and Testimony.’ 

“1st. The acts of the last General Assembly 
on Overtures Nos. 6 and 7 and Resolution No. 
4 on the Report of the Board of Domestic Mis¬ 
sions, in the judgment of this Synod, are un¬ 
wise, as tending to destroy tho peace and har¬ 
mony of the Church, and in some of their 
provisions unconstitutional and unscriptural, 
and we indulge the hope and belief that the 
General Assembly in calmer times, will review 
and correct these deliver ces. 

“2nd. Whilst the Synol thus, in" firm but 
respectful terms, expresses disapprobation of 
these acts, it is also the Judgment of the Synod 


56 


that neither these acts nor the deliverances of 
the General Assembly on the state of the coun¬ 
try, made in years 1861, 1862, 1868, and 1864, 
nor any or all of them, justify a withdrawal 
from our connection with the General Assem¬ 
bly, and we here again assert, we will ‘adhere 
with ubroken purpose to the Presbyterian 
Church of the United states’ and will oppose 
every effort to interrupt our ecclesiastical re¬ 
lations with the General Assembly, or to pro¬ 
duce schism or division on the Ground of said 
acts and deliverances. 

“3rd. The Synod, having caused a certain 
paper, styled the ‘Declaration and Tertimony,’ 
lately adopted by the Presbytery of Louisville, 
to be read in its hearing, and having careful¬ 
ly considered the same, hereby expresses its 
disapprobation of the terms of this paper, and 
of its spirit and intent, indicated on its face, 
as looking to the further agitation of the 
Church, if not its division, at a time when 
great mutual forbearance is called for among 
brethren to the end that we may have quiet¬ 
ness and repose. Wherefore the Synod enjoins 
upon the Presbytery of Louisville, in particu¬ 
lar, and upon all the Presbyteries and Church¬ 
es, Ministers and people subject to it in the 
Lord, to forbear whatever tends to distur¬ 
bance and alienation, beseeching them in the 
name of our Lord Jesus Christ that ‘they all 
speak the same thing, and that there be no 
divisions among them; but that they be per¬ 
fectly joined together in the same mind and in 
the same judgment.’ 

“Finally, this Synod earnestly recommends 
to all under its charge to ‘study the things 
which make for peace,’ to exercise great mu¬ 
tual forbearance towards each other, and ‘en¬ 
deavoring to keep the unity of the spirit in 
the bond of peace,’ prayerfully trusting that 
in the good providenoe of God, a way may be 
opened for reunion, under the General Assem¬ 
bly, of all who profess the faith, adhere to the 
standards and love tho order of the Presbyte¬ 
rian Church. 

The call for the previous question on the 
motion to adopt said paper, item by item, was 
made. The call was sustained, and on motion, 
it was ordered that the yeas and nays on each 
item and upon the whole paper be recorded. 
The first item was adopted by yeas, 16; nays, 
22; non liquet, 1, as follows: 

Yeas —S S, McRoberts, S B Cheek, T H 
Cleland, W. J. McKnight, M. Sanders, G. J. 
Reid, G. 0. Barnes, J. A. Bogle, J. V. Logan, 
W. F. McKinney, D. P. Young, J. H. Moore, 
W. Sampson, G. W. Welsh, J. P. Lapsley, J. 
Paxton, J. R. Hughes, W. H. Forsythe, J. G. 
Simrall, F. G. Strahan, T. A. Bracken, R. 
Douglass, M Van Lear, J. S. Hays, W. George, 
G. H. Rout, J. M. Scott, W. B. Brown, R. 
Young, W. H. Rainey, J. F. Bell, W- B. Kin- 
kaid, S. Holloway, S. C Bull, G. Marshall, J. 
C. Young, W. C. Matthews, M. G. Knight, R. 
Morrison, J. L. McKee, E. Wurts, S. R. Wil¬ 
son, J. V. Cosby, S. B. McPheeters, W. W. 
Hill, W. L. Nourse, J. N. Sanders, I. N. Can¬ 


field, R. V. Sprowl, B. A. Brown, A. G. Watts, 
D. L. Brooks, P. Jett, G. Bergen, R. Knott, L. 
L. Warren, J. Gault, D. McKinley, S. Casse- 
day, C. A. Wickliffe, W. C. Hanna, T. H. 
Urmiton, D. 0. Davies, R. F. Caldwell, J. E. 
Spilman, B. M Hobson, J. M. Evans, J. P. 
Hendrick, W. W. Duncan, J. M. Preston, E. 
Howe, W. L. Breckinridge, J. Woodbridge, P. 
Thompson, J. M. Herdman, E. F. Easton—76. 

Nays —R. A. Johnston, E. P. Humphrey, J. 
S. Braddock, W. H. Honnell, R. W. Landis, J. 
Matthews, J. Cooper. H. H. Allen, J. T. Laps¬ 
ley, R. L. Stanton, B. N. Penick, S. S. Fry, R. 
J. Breckinridge, S. Yerkes, J. K. Lyle, R. 
Morrison, J. H. Dinsmore, W. T. McElroy, J. 
F. Coons, C. A. Preston, S. Y. Garrison, A. C. 
Dickerson—22. 

Non liquet —J. L. Walker—1. 

The second item was adopted by yeas, 57; 
nays, 85; non liquet, 10: 

Yeas— S S McRoberts, S B Cheek, E P 
Humphrey, T H Cleland, J S Braddock, W H 
Honnell, R W Landis, W J McKnight, J Mat¬ 
thews, J Cooper, H H Allen, J T Lapsley, R L 
Stanton, G J Reid, W L Breckinridge, J A 
Bogle, B N Penick, S S Fry, W F McKinney, 
W Sampson, G W Welsh, W H Wherritt, R J 
Breckinridge, S Yerkes, J K Lyle, J S Hays, G 
Morrison, G H Rout, W B Brown, W H Rainey, 
W B Kinkaid, S C Bull, W C Matthews, M G 
Knight, J L McKee, J P McMillan, B A Brown, 
A G Watts, R Knott, L L Warren, D McKin¬ 
ley, R F Caldwell, J E Spilman, B M Hobson, 
J M Evans, J F Coons, J P Hjndrick, J M 
Preston, C A Preston, J Woodbridge, S Y 
Garrison, A C Dickerson, J M Herdman, J H 
Dinsmore, J L Walker, J C Young, G W Riley 
—58. 

Nays —M Sanders, G 0 Barnes, D P Young, 
J V Logan, J Paxton, J R Hughes, W H For¬ 
sythe, F G Strahan, R Douglass, W George, J 
M Scott, G Marshall, J F Bell, S Holloway, R 
Morrison, W T McElroy, W W Duncan, S R 
Wilson, J V Cosby, S B McPheeters, W L 
Nourse, J N Sanders, I N Canfield, R V 
Sprowl, D L Brooks, P Jett, G Bergen, J Gault, 
S Casseday, C A Wickliffe, W C Hanna, D 0 
Davies, P Thompson, E F Easton, R Young— 
35. 

Non liquet —J H Moore, J P Lapsley, T A 
Bracken, M Van Lear, E Wurts, W W Hill, T 
H Urmston, E Howe, J G Simrall—9. 

The third item was adopted by yeas, 54 ; 
nays, 46; non liquet, 2. 

Yeas —R A Johnston, S S McRoberts, S B 
Cheek, T H Cleland, E P Humphrey, J S Brad¬ 
dock, W H Honnell, R W Landis, W J Mc¬ 
Knight, J Matthews, J Cooper, H H Allen, $ 
T Lapsley, R L Stanton, G J Reid, W L Breck¬ 
inridge, J A Bogle, B N Penick, S S Fry, W F 
McKinney, W Sampson, G W Welsh, W H 
Wherritt, R J Breckinridge, S Yerkes, J K 
Lyle, J S Hays, G Morrison, W H Rainey, W 
B Kinkaid, S C Bull, W C Matthews, J H 
Dinsmore, M G Knight, J L McKee, J P Mc¬ 
Millan, J C Young, B A Brown, A G Watts, R 
Knott, L L Warren, G W Riley, D McKinley,, 



57 


T H Urmston, R F Caldwell, J E Spilman, J 
M Evans, J F Coons, J P Hendrick, J L Walk¬ 
er, J M Preston, C A Preston, S Y Garrison, 
A C Dickerson—54. 

Nays —M Sanders, G 0 Barnes, D P Young, 
J V Loean, J H Moore, J Paxton, J P Lapsley, 
J R Hughes, W H Forsythe, J G Simrall, F G 
Strahan, T A Bracken, R Douglass, M Van 
Lear, W George, G H Rout, W B Brown, R 
Young, G Marshall, J F Bell, J M Scott, S 
Holloway, R Morrison, E Wurts, W T McElroy, 
W W Duncan, S R Wilson, S B McPheeters, W 
W Hill, J N Sanders, I N Canfield, R V 
Sprowl, D L Brcoks, P Jett, G Bergen, J Gault, 
S Casseday, C A Wickliffe, W C Hanna, D 0 
Davies, B M Hobson, E Howe, J Woodbridge, 
P Thompson, J M Herdman, E F Easton—46. 

Kon liquet —J V Cosby, W L Nourse—2. 

The fourth and last item was adopted unan¬ 
imously by one hundred votes. 

The whole paper was adopted by yea*, 53; 
nays, 47; non liquet, 2. 

Yeas —R A Johnston S S McRoberts, S B 
Cheek, E P Humphrey, T H Cleland, J S 
Braddock, A C Dickerson, W H Honnell, R 
W Land'8, W J McKnight, J Matthews, J. 
Cooper, H II Allen, J T Lapsley, G J Reid W 
L Breckinridge, B N Penick; S S Fry, W F 
McKinney, W Sampson, J Paxton, G W Welsh, 
JP Lansley, W H Wherritt, R J Breckinridge! 
J G Simrall. S Yerkes, J K Lyle, J S Hays, G 
Morrison, W H Rainey, W B Kinkaid, S C 
Bull W C Matthews, J H Dinsmore, M G 
Knight, J L McKee, J P McMillan, J C Young 
B A Brown, A G Watts, R Knott, L L Warren, 
G W Riley, D McKinley, R F Caldwell, J E 
Spilman, J M Evans, J F Coons, J P Hendrick, 

J L Walker, J M Preston, S Y Garrison—58. 

Nays —M Sanders, R L Stanton, D P Young, 

J V Logan. J H Moore, J R Hughes, W H Fori 
sythe, F G Strahan, T A- Bracken, R Douglass, 
M Van Lear, W George, G H Rout, J M Scott 
W B Brown, R Young, G Marshall, J F Bell 
S Holloway, G 0 Barnes, R Morrison, E 
Wurts, W T McElroy, W W Duncan, S*R 
Wilson, J V Cosby, S B McPheeter^, w’w 
Hill, W L Nourse, J N Sanders, I N Canfield, 
R V Sprowl, D L Brooks, P Jett, G Bergen, J 
Gault, S Casseday, C A Wickliffe. W C Hanna, 

H Berkley, T II Urmston, D 0 Davies, B M 
Hobson, j Woodbridge, P Thompson, J M Herd- 
man, E F Easton—47. 

Non liquet —C A Preston, E Howe—2. 

These acts of the Synod of Kentucky cover 
a period of five years. We desire one thing, 
among others, to be specially noted. The 
constant testimony of Synod against schism — 
its repeated, emphatic declaration that there 
is no cause in any or all the deliverances of the 
Assembly to justify a rupture in the bosom 
of the Church. 


Schism in the Synod of Kentucky. 

The above Synodical papers and the votes 
on them reveal the fact that the opposition to 
the Assembly had been gradually assuming 
the attitude and proportions of a serious seism 
in the bosom of Synod. In Oct. 1866, Synod 
met at Henderson Ky, when the seliism finally 
consummated. We give below statement if the 
proceedings; and the important papers subse¬ 
quently adopted by the true Synod, at its ses¬ 
sion in Lexington Ky, in November follow¬ 
ing. 

Division of Synod at Henderson. 

After the division occurred at Henderson a 
Committee, with Di\ E. P. Humphrey, Chair¬ 
man, was appointed to prepare a careful state¬ 
ment of the facts. That Committee presented 
their final report, at the meeting of Synod at 
Lexington. The paper passed through several 
readings, every sentence and every statement 
was carefully considered by the whole Synod, 
some slight amendments made, and then adopt- 
ted. It is as follows: 

After sermon, the Synod was called to order 
and constituted with prayer by Rev. Mr. Breck, 
Moderator of the former Synod. The Stated 
Clerk of Synod, the Rev. S. S. McRoberts, then 
proceeded to call the roll, beginning with the 
Presbytery of Louisville, using for the pur¬ 
pose, according to the standing order of Synod, 
the list of members furnished him by the Rev. 
R. Valentine, Stated Clerk of the Presbytery. 
As he was about to call the churches of that 
Presbytery, Mr. Beck interrupted the proceed¬ 
ings and directed Mr. McRoberts to call the 
names of “all the constituent elements” of the 
Synod, meaning thereby, in addition to those 
already enrolled, the ministers whom the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly had forbidden to sit in any 
church court higher than a session, together 
with the ministers who had openly renounced 
the jurisdiction of the Assembly, until some 
future Assembly shall set aside as null and 
void certain acts of certain Assemblies; and 
the ministers who, after their Presbyteries 
had been dissolved by acts of disobedience 
to an order of the last Assembly, had proceed¬ 
ed to business in defiance of the authority of 
the Assembly. Mr. McRoberts refused to 
obey the requirement of Mr. Breck, for the 
reason that it was in direct palpable violation 
of the order of the Assembly. Mr. Breck then 
declared that he would himself call complete 
the roll of Synod, thus usurping the office of 
Stated Clerk; as this office is defined in the 
invariable customs, and written rules of the 
Church. Mr. Breck added that he should rule 
as out of order, any and every motion that 
might be made, until he should complete the 
roll. Col. Geo. T. Wood, Ruling Elder, rose to 
protest against the course of Mr. Breck, as 
wholly repugnant to any parliamentary law ; 
and Dr. R. J. Breckinridge, to protest on be¬ 
half of himself, and those who intended to ad¬ 
here to the General Assembly, against this 


58 


usurpation, and unlawful conduct on the part 
of Mr. Breck, and both of these brethren were 
called to order by Mr. Breck, and were cried 
down by a loud clamor in the house; and were 
not allowed to take an appeal to the Synod, 
from tha ruling of the Moderator. The Rev. 
R. Douglass then rose to submit a motion, but 
was ruled out of order by Mr. Breck. Mr. 
Breck then called upon Dr. W. W. Hill, of the 
dissolved Presbytery of Louisville, to act as 
his clerk, and proceeded to call the roll from 
the printed minutes of the Assembly begin¬ 
ning with the Presbytery of Ebenezer, and en¬ 
rolling as entitled to seats the names of all 
the ministers and elders who answered to the 
call, including the names of a large number 
of those who had no right to seats, for the rea¬ 
son that they had signed or voted for the adop¬ 
tion of the Declaration and Testimony; or for 
the reason that they had renounced the juris¬ 
diction of the Assembly, as above stated; or 
lor the reason that they had in their Presby¬ 
teries proceeded to business after their Pres¬ 
byteries had been dissolved, as herein before 
stated. The ministers and elders present who 
were resolved to obey the authority and sup¬ 
port the jurisdiction of the General Assembly, 
sat still and refused to answer to their names. 
The roll, as made out by Mr. Breck in the 
manner aforesaid, was then read by Dr. Hill. 
Dr. W. C. Matthews, whose name had been 
duly enrolled and called by Mr. McRoberts, 
arose to speak. Mr. Breck asked him if he 
desired to enter his name on the roll as just 
made out, and on Dr. Matthews declining to 
answer, Mr. Breck said, “I do not know you, 
sir/’ and would not allow him to be heard. 
The ministers and elders so enrolled by Mr. 
Breck, then proceeded to the election of per¬ 
sons as Moderator, Stated Clerk and Temporary 
Clerk, every one of whom was disqualified to 
sit in Synod, and the last named a signer of 
the Declaration and Testimony. The body 
then adjourned. Whereupon Dr. McKee, the 
last Moderator present, took the chair and 
announced that the Synod of Kentucky was 
then in session. The Stated Clerk proceeded 
with the calling of the roll, beginning at the 
point where he had been arrested by the un- 
lawful interference of Mr. Breck, and calling 
only those who were entitled to seats, and 
omitting the names of those who were dis¬ 
qualified to sit as herein before described. 
The roll, as thus completed, was then read and 
approved. 

Report on the Minute» of the Assembly , Adopted 

by the Synod of Kentucky at Lexington. 

The following report was adopted by the 
Synod of Kentucky at its adjourned meeting 
at Lexington: 

The Committee on the Minutes of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly respectfully report the follow¬ 
ing paper for the consideration of the Synod : 

1. Seasons for Special Prayer.— The at¬ 
tention of the m’nisters and churches under 
our care, is earnestly called to the appoint¬ 


ment by the Assembly of two seasons for 
special prayer, viz: The last Thursday in Feb¬ 
ruary, in behalf of Colleges and other insti¬ 
tutions of learning, and for the conversion of 
the rising generation, especially the children 
of the church; and the second week in Janu¬ 
ary, including the first and second Sabbaths, 
as a week of prayer for the outpouring of the 
spirit of God upon all flesh. In connection 
with the first of these, the Assembly desig¬ 
nates the first Sabbath of March as a period 
for solemnly addressing parents and children 
upon their respective duties. In connection 
with the second, remembrance is made of the 
mercy God has displayed toward his Church 
in times past, in answering prayer. The Sy¬ 
nod urges upon all under its jurisdiction the 
devout observance of these special services. 
God has graciously vouchsafed heretofore a 
listening ear to the cry of his people; let 
them not withhold prayer now. Let them 
prove the Lord again, if he will not open the 
windows of heaven and pour out renewed 
blessings upon them. In this sad day of de¬ 
fection and opposition our own institutions of 
learning demand, and that in an eminent de¬ 
gree, the prayers and fostering care of the 
faithful. 

2. The Boards of the Church.— The opera¬ 
tions of the Boards claimed, of course, a large 
share of the time and attention of the last as 
of previous Assemblies. These are the organ¬ 
ized instrumentalities whereby the Church is 
endeavoring to accomplish, in its manifold as¬ 
pects, the great work committed to it of its 
Divine Head. Every follower of the Savior of 
our order should feel a profound interest in 
their conduct; should become acquainted with 
their works, their wants, their failures and 
their successes; and should ever cherish a 
lively sense of the obligations resting upon 
him to support them by his prayers, and by 
liberal contributions according to the measure 
of this world’s goods committed to his stew¬ 
ardship. Hence it becomes the imperative 
duty of the rulers in God’s house to examine 
carefully the proceedings of the Assembly 
touching these important interests, and the 
reports of the Boards themselves; to instruct 
the people of God of their duty herein, to 
awakeu their interest, to elicit their sympa¬ 
thy and co-operation, and to give them the 
opportunity of contributing statedly to the 
advadcement of the Redeemer’s kingdom. 
This Synod most affectionately and earnest¬ 
ly solicits its own members, and the people 
under its care, to consider the recommenda¬ 
tions and injunctions of the Assembly relating 
to the varied work entrusted to the Boards, 
and solemnly enjoins upon them the faithful 
discharge of their obligations to the Church 
and to her glorified Redeemer. 

All the more incumbent is the duty to sus¬ 
tain the Boards at the present time, because of 
the persistent efforts of late to alienate them 
from the hearts of the Presbyterians of Ken¬ 
tucky. And these efforts, it is painful to add, 



59 


have been attended with no inconsiderable de¬ 
gree of success. In comparatively few of our 
congregations have collections been taken up, 
as in former times. Distrust or indifference 
have taken the place of confidence and cor¬ 
dial co-operation. These things ought not so 
to be. The Boards deserve the confidence and 
support of the churches. Unwise and unsta¬ 
ble men, mistaken, misled, infatuated, have 
brought about the condition of things we now 
deplore. The spirit of faction and schism has 
entered the sanctuary and sapped the founda¬ 
tions of peace, prosperity and zeal in the cause 
of the Lord, Earnest should be the endeavor 
now to restore what has been broken down, to 
reinstate the whole work of the church in the 
affections of our people, and to kindle anew 
their zeal and devotion to it. At the meeting 
of Synod in 1861, at Ilarrodsburg, the follow¬ 
ing action was taken : “In the actual state of 
affairs, and until the present evil times are 
overpast, the Synod, without affecting its per¬ 
manent relations to the Boards, advises the 
Presbyteries under its care to take charge of 
the cause of Domestic Missions and the cause 
of Education, as related to the cases of bene¬ 
ficiary candidates for the ministry, in their 
bounds respectively.” 

In regard to this action it is to be observed 
(1.) That it is simply advisory in its nature; 
(2.) That it was a tempory measure, “until the 
present evil times are overpast, (3.) That it 
was. not to affect our “permanent relations to 
the Boards.” It is unquestionably certain 
that the great and only object aimed at was 
to secure harmony throughout our bounds 
while the “evil times” continued. It was 
staled, moreover, on the floor of Synod, at the 
time, by one authorized to speak for them, that 
such action had had beforehand the approba¬ 
tion of the Secretaries of these two Boaids. 
In the minute, too, of which this action is a 
part, the Synod declares “that it adhers with 
unbroken purpose to the Presbyterian Church 
in the United States of America, and enjoins 
upon all its members, and upon all under its 
control and care, to avoid all divisible and 
schismatical courses, to cultivate the peace of 
the church, and to practice great mutual for¬ 
bearance.” How signally this considerate 
measure failed to preserve peace and harmony 
amoug us, the progress of events has but too 
fully demonstrated. And not only so; it has 
been made the occasion of casting foul obliquy 
upon the Synod, by the most wanton miscon¬ 
struction of its terms and its purpose. In a 
document issued last August, in the form of 
an address to the Presbyterian people of Ken¬ 
tucky, and which acquired importance only 
from its being signed by fifty-four persons, at 
that time ministers and ruling elders in the 
Presbyterian Church—in the document, re¬ 
ferring to the minute passed at Harrodsburg, 
the signers of it say: “The Synod so far sus¬ 
pended its relations to those Boards of the 
General Assembly, whose work it deemed ca¬ 
pable of being done by itself, as to take that 


work, within its bounds, into its own hands; 
which, it is believed, was in preparation for 
the contingency of the Synod feeling con¬ 
strained to take an independent position.” It 
is perfectly manifest that this is a perversion 
of the Synod's action, and a most unwarrant¬ 
able representation of ils purpose; much 
harsher teims, indeed, could be justly used in 
characterizing such a statement. The Synod 
had no thought of makiDg preparation to take 
an independent position; no intention of en¬ 
tering a wedge which should eventually sun¬ 
der its relations to the General Assembly. All 
this may have been in the minds of some, in 
whose hearts the fell spirit of schism has al¬ 
ready been doing its evil work; but such was 
not the mind of the Synod. The darling pro¬ 
ject of inducing the Synod to take an inde¬ 
pendant position, was steadily and stealthily 
pursued from the day of that meeting at Har¬ 
rodsburg, and finally culminated in the fla¬ 
grant schism at Henderson. The address to 
the Presbyterian people of Kentucky was it¬ 
self the product of an organized manifestation 
of the spirit that had fomented in secret for 
several years. To subserve the bad end in 
view, the action at Harrodsburg was con¬ 
stantly misrepresented. Furthermore, the 
new ecclesiastical body recently constituted 
at Henderson, claiming the names, rights and 
authority of the Synod of Kentucky, has not 
only assailed, in a published address, the 
members of this court and the Presbyteries 
under its care, charging them with “reckess 
violence aod wrong,” but has reiterated the 
unfounded assertion that “five years since the 
Synod, by unanimous resolution, suspended 
its former relations to the Board of Domestic 
Missions.” Yet it did no such thing, and even 
the advice then given was not followed by all 
the Presbyteries. The same convention of ec¬ 
clesiastics, absurdly claiming still to be a part 
of the Presbyterian Church in the United 
States of America, has organized a Committee 
of Domestic Missions and commended it to the 
support of those rightfully under our juris¬ 
diction, thus endeavoring to supplant one of 
the most important Boards of the Church. 
Now, in view of these facts, this Synod deems 
it timely to declare that the action taken at 
Harrodsburg. touching the charge by Presby¬ 
teries of the causes of Domestic Missions and 
Education, has expired in virtue of the limi¬ 
tation in the terms thereof. The advice, there¬ 
fore, is withdrawn; and the inferior judicato¬ 
ries and churches under our care are hereby 
advised to prosecute hereafter these interests 
of the Church in connection with the agencies 
appointed by the General Assembly. 

3. Systematic Benevolence. —That atten¬ 
tion of Presbyteries, ministers and Christian 
people is directed to the action of the Assem¬ 
bly on the subject of systematic benevolence, 
found on page 96 of the printed minutes. 
(Here read.) Beyond all doubts the progress 
of the kingdom of God in our midst is condi¬ 
tioned in no small degree upon a faithful 


60 


compliance with these injunctions of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly. Let heed be given to them. 

4. Organic Union of the Old and New 
Schools.— The question of the reunion of the 
two bodies into which the Presbyterian Church 
was formerly divided in 1838, has been much 
discussed of late in the newspapers and peri¬ 
odicals, and in many of the judicatories of 
the church. It was brought before the last 
Assembly by overtures from six different 
Presbyteries, all urging the Assembly to take 
measures to secure at an early day the organic 
union of two denominations. Our Assembly 
appointed a committee of fifteen to confer with 
a similar committee appointed by the other 
Assembly, “in regard to the desirableness a-nd 
practicability of reunion, and if, after con¬ 
ference and inquiry, such reunion shall seem 
to be desirable and practicable, to suggest 
suitable measures for its accomplishment and 
report to the next General Assembly. 1 '' This 
Synod fully recognizes the scriptural doctrine 
of the oneness of the body of Christ and freely 
acknowledges the obligation imposed upon all 
the members of that body to seek after an out¬ 
ward realization of unity corresponding to 
the internal, so far and as sptedily as the 
providence of God shall open up the way. 
But to bring into organic union bodies not 
heartily one in doctrine, order and polity 
would be fraught with evil. Apart, but side 
by side, they may labor peaceably and effect¬ 
ively in building up the kingdom of their 
common Master; forced together, alienation, 
bitterness, strife and ultimately separation 
again would be the unavoidable and unseemly 
consequences. Two cannot walk together ex¬ 
cept they be agreed. The division of the 
Presbyterian Church which it is now sought 
to heal originated in differences of opinion 
touching the very fundamentals of our doc¬ 
trine and polity. The real and avowed causes 
of the separation were vital; they reached to 
the very foundations of the Church’s distinc¬ 
tive being. The issues made and arbitrated 
were of supreme moment to the peace, purity, 
power and testimony of the Church. If, then, 
the causes of separation still exist, “the union 
of the two bodies,” as has been well said, 
“would involve on our part, an utter derilec 
tion of pr’nciple. It would be an acknowledg¬ 
ment that we had been either false or mis¬ 
guided in all that was done in effecting the 
deliverance of the Church; or it would evince 
that we ourselves had apostatized from the 
faith of our fathers and were willing to sac¬ 
rifice our faith for unworthy ends. It would 
also be a grievous breach of trust, and would 
forfeit morally, if not. legally, our titles to the 
endowments of all our institutions.” If on 
the other hand, the original causes of separa¬ 
tion have ceased to exist, there may be no 
▼alid objection to the reunion of the two 
bodies; no obstacle that patience and wisdom 
may not surmount. But is there evidence 
that the indispensable prerequisites to a happy 
union do really exist? that these bodies are 


now of one mind on the essential questions 
that formerly necessitated a division ? There 
is no such evidence before the Church. It hag 
been called for, but it has not been produced. 
We are constrained to believe that no such evi¬ 
dence exists. There is, however, much evi¬ 
dence going to show that the causes which led 
to the disruption nearly thirty years ago, do 
still exist. Such being the facts, this Synod 
does not see that the way is prepared for or¬ 
ganic reunion, and regards with grave appre¬ 
hension the posture in which this business 
now st >nds. The zeal with which the measure 
is pursued, is not in our judgment, according 
to knowledge. It is hasty, untimely, not re¬ 
gardful enough of souud doctrine and scrip¬ 
tural order; and if unchecked, will lead to 
incalculable mischief. Should this measure 
be precipitated, instead of subserving the 
cause of Christian union, it will most assured¬ 
ly promote dissension. 

5 Dealing with the Signers of the Dec¬ 
laration and Testimony. —In the fall of 1865 
this Synod condemned a most violent and 
abusive attack upon our branch of the Church 
of God, commonly knowu as the Declaration 
and Testimony. The Assembly of 1866 con¬ 
demned that notorious paper “as a slander 
against the Church, schismatical in its charac¬ 
ter and aims, and in its adoption by any of 
our church courts as an act of rebellion 
against the authority of the General Assem¬ 
bly. 

These severe terms of censure met the 
hearty approval of this body. They are dis¬ 
criminating and just. The Assembly also in¬ 
stituted judicial process against the signers of 
the said Declaration and Testimony; and in a 
manner now so well known that it is needless 
to recite it here. In the measures adopted, 
this Synod recognizes an earnest desire on the 
part of the Assembly to vindicate the charac¬ 
ter and authority of the Church, and to pro¬ 
mote her peace and purity in the exercise of 
the constitutional “power of reproving, warn¬ 
ing, or bearing testimony against error in doc¬ 
trine or immortality in practice,” and “of 
suppressing schismatical contentions and dis¬ 
putations;” and a like desire to do its duty in 
the premises, in the spirit of forbearance to¬ 
ward the offending, so far as truth and prin¬ 
ciple would permit. And while it is not our 
proviuce to review and pass judgment upon 
the judicial proceedings of our supreme tri¬ 
bunal, from which lies no appeal, we deem it 
timely, on this occasion, to express our una¬ 
bated confidence in the integrity of that high 
court, and our determination, as loyal sons of 
the Church, to yield all due obedience to its 
decisions. With us, this obedience is not a 
matter of choice; it is imposed upon us by the 
anointed King in Zion. In our ordination 
vows, we professed to receive as a part of the 
revealed will of God, that the Church should 
be governed by Assemblies, “whose decrees 
and determinations, if consonant with the 
word of God, are to be received with rever- 



61 


ence and submission, not only for their agree¬ 
ment with the word, but also for the power 
whereby they are made , as being an ordinance of 
God appointed thereunto in His word." 


Narrative of the State of Religion Adopted by the 
Synod of Kentucky at Lexington. 

The Committee on the narrative of the state 
of religion within the bounds of the Synod of 
Kentucky, have but little to report which does 
not call for sorrow and lamentation. 

One of our Presbyteries sends up the state¬ 
ment “ that most of our pastors and stated sup¬ 
plies report nothing of interest as to the state 
of religion in their congregations, and some 
are led to deplore a low state of piety among 
their people. These facts, together with the 
present distress felt by us all in relation to 
the existing troubles in the Church, form the 
discouraging views of the state of religion in 
eur bounds.” Another Presbytery says: “the 
disturbed condition of the country from the 
late war, and the disturbed state of the Church, 
prevent our churches, in many instances, 
from enjoying the stated means of grace, and 
hinder their securing the services of the gos¬ 
pel miuistry.” Another says; “The state of 
religion within our bounds has been by no 
means of an encouraging nature. We have a 
wide field, almost entirely destitute of the 
preaching of the gospel by ministers of our 
denomination.” Another says : “The state of 
religion is now evil, and has been so for sever¬ 
al years past, because of the divided judgments 
and feelings of our people with reference to 
the recent acts of the General Assembly, on 
the subjects of loyalty to the government of 
the United States, and of Emancipation.” And 
still another says; “That there is but little of 
an encouraging nature in our bounds. The 
effects of the unhappy division in our midst 
have greatly obstructed the progress of religion 
in our field.” And while most of our Presby¬ 
teries note indications of encouragement,—one 
saying, “Still there are indications of a hope¬ 
ful character—the seed has been sown, and in 
some instances it has brought forth fruit to the 
glory of God;” and another saying: 

“Seven of our ministers report that the Di¬ 
vine blessing has attended their labors in more 
than ordinary measure—ten of our churches 
have been refreshed within the last twelve 
months.” And another; “The churches which 
adhere, as heretofore, to the General Assembly 
and the Standards of our Church are more 
united and firmer than ever in their detrmina- 
tion to prosecute, with energy and prayerful 
effort, the work of the Lord in their midst and 
haye more enjoyed the privilege and benefits 
or matured intercourse and Christian commu- 
nion—the stated ordinances of God’s house 
have been continued; Sabbath-schools are in 
some of our churches in an encouraging con¬ 
dition, and there is ground for hope that the 
Lord will before long gladden the hearts of his 
people.” Ebenezer Presbytery alone speaks 


in terms entirely encouraging, saying, “That 
the state of religion within our bounds has 
been, during the last year, truly encouraging 
—most of the churches have had additions on 
the profession of faith—some of them 40 and 
some 50, in all about 300 souls within the 
bounds of this Presbytery.” 

We note the fact, every report front our Pres¬ 
byteries specially connects the discouraging 
view of the state of religion with certain mat¬ 
ters which, for some years past, have been 
agitating the Church. During the years 
1861-1866 the General Assembly took certain 
actions as to the duties of our General Govern¬ 
ment, in a time of civil rebellion, and relative 
to the duties of our people to the same in that 
emergency; also relative to the emancipation 
of the slaves in the United States; also rela¬ 
tive to the conduct of those Christians who had 
aided the rebellion. And while these acts 
strictly aceord with those of the General As¬ 
semblies of the United States and Scotland, of 
former days, in like cases; and also accord 
strictly with the religious convictions of the 
great body of our Presbyterian family, and 
what their consciences required of them as 
religious duty, at the time; certain persons of 
this Synod organized opposition to these acts, 
and have persisted in this opposition until a 
schism has been made in the body of this 
Synod. Our General Assembly in 1861 urged 
upon the United States Government the solemn 
duty of exercising its lawful authority in put¬ 
ting down the rebellion, and maintaining law 
and order throughout the nation, and urged 
our people to sustain our Government herein. 
In 1862 the General Assembly judged the at¬ 
tempt to overthrow our government and divide 
the nation, contrary to the wishes of the im¬ 
mense majority of our people, “traitorous,” 
contrary to the dictates of natural religion and 
morality, and plainly condemned by the reveal¬ 
ed will of God; and bore its testimony against 
the conduct of those Christians who had aided 
and countenanced this evil work. The General 
Assembly in 1864 recited the former deliver¬ 
ances of our Church upon slavery and the duty 
of emancipation, and deemed it timely to take 
such further action as to it seemed proper, to 
meet the present aspects of human bondage in 
our country; showing that it had in 1787 high¬ 
ly approved of measures then on foot, looking 
to the abolition of slavery, and recommended 
to our people efforts to procure the final aboli¬ 
tion of slavery in America; and had in 1795 
“ assured all the churches under its care that 
it viewed with the deepest concern any vestiges 
of slavery which may exist in our country;” 
and that in 1815 “expressed its regret that the 
slavery of the Africans and their descendants 
still continues in many places, and even among 
those within the Church, and urged our people 
to religiously educate and prepare their slaves 
for the enjoyment of liberty when God in his 
providence may open a door for their emanci¬ 
pation;” and have declared in 1818, “the 
voluntary enslaving of one portion of the 



62 


human race by another, a gross violation of the members of any church within the bounds 
the most precious and sacred rights of human of the schism, who are loyal to the government 
nature—inconsistent with the Law of God and of the United States, and whose views are in 


totally irreconcilable with the spirit and prin¬ 
ciples of the gospel of Christ; and that it is 
manifestly the duty of all Christians to use 
their honest and unwearied endeavours to 
correct the errors of former times as speedily 
as possible and elface this blot from our holy 
religion and to obtain the complete abolition 
of slavery throughout Christendom and that no 
greater delay ought to take place than the 
public welfare demands.” Recognizing the 
fact that the Church has from the beginning 
been waiting on God to open a door for the 
abolition of slavery and urging those under 
her care to use diligence in getting themselves 
and their slaves ready for that day. The Gen¬ 
eral Assembly of 1864 declared it to be its 
solemn conviction that this day had come: “It 
is our judgment that the recent events of our 
history and the present condition of our Church 
and country furnished manifest tokens that 
the time has at length come, in the provi¬ 
dence of God, when it is his will that every 
vestige of human slavery among us should be 
effaced, and that every Christian man should 
address himself with industry and earnestness 
to his appropriate part in the performance of 
this great duty: that the excuses for its post¬ 
ponement no longer exist: that under the in¬ 
fluence of the most incomprehensible infatu¬ 
ation of wickedness, those who were most 
deeply interested in the perpetuation of slave¬ 
ry have taken away every motive for its 
further toleration and rendered its continuance 
incompatible with the preservation of our own 
liberty.” And noting the facts that in the 
Struggle of the nation for existence against 
powerful and wicked treason, the highest ex¬ 
ecutive authorities had proclaimed the abolition 
of slavery within the rebel States, and decreed 
its execution by military force, and that after¬ 
wards slavery had been prohibited in all parts 
of the United States by amendment of the 
Constitution, aud that the voice of the nation 
was declaring that civil Government should not 
be re-organized in the rebel States upon any oth¬ 
er basis than of emancipation. The General As¬ 
sembly judged the difficulties which once seem¬ 
ed insurmountable on this subject had been re¬ 
moved by Divine Providence, and expressed 
their gratitude to Almighty God for having over¬ 
ruled the wickedness of the rebellion so as to 
work out the deliverance of our country from 
the evils and guilt of slavery. And in 1865, it 
being in the knowledge of the General Assem¬ 
bly, that during the existence of the rebellion 
which had recently disturbed the peace and 
threatened the life of the nation, a large num¬ 
ber of Presbyteries and Synods in the Southern 
States had organized an Assembly in order to 
render their aid to the attempt to establish, by 
rebellion, a separate nation and conserve aud 
perpetuate slavery our Assembly “declared 
their acts herein unwarranted, schismatical, 
unconstitutional and recognized as the Church, 


harmony with the Confession of Faith, and 
with the several Testimonies of the Presbyte¬ 
rian Church on thesubjectof Domestic Slavery, 
and directed Presbyteries to treat with kind¬ 
ness, ministers and churches who are disloyal, 
or not in sympathy with the former deliver¬ 
ances of the General Assembly on the subject 
of slavery, and to receive them when they 
properly acknowledge and renounce their 
errors.” Against these acts certain persons of 
our own number prepared, signed and publish¬ 
ed a Declaration and Testimony; saying of 
them, “Our Church has been departing farther 
and farther from both the spirit and plain 
letter of her commission to preach the gospel 
and her charter, as a kingdom not of this 
world. ’ That “by the decisions of the Supreme 
Judicatory of the Church in 1864, the consum¬ 
mation seems to have been reached, and the 
seal finally set upon all previous and uncon¬ 
stitutional and unscriptural acts of the body; 
that these acts are a subversion of the law of 
Christ’s Kingdom and surrendering of the 
crown rights of Zion's King, on account of 
which the name and honour of our Lord are 
everywhere blasphemed;” and charging an 
“assumption, on the part of the Courts of the 
Church, of the right to decide questions of 
State policy, characterizing these deliverances 
of the late Assemblies as a sanction given by 
the Church to the perversion of the teachings of 
Christ and his apostles upon the subject of the 
duty of Christians as citizens : declaring that 
the Assemblies ©f 1864 and 1865 have laid 
down a new doctrine upon the subject of slave¬ 
ry, unknown to the apostolic and primitive 
Church—a doctrine which has its origin in 
infidelity and fanaticism: representing certain 
language of the Assemblies of 1864 and 1865 
as an unjust and scandalous contradiction of 
their own recorded testimony and of well 
known facts: asserting that the Assemblies of 
1861 and 1864 countenanced the doctrine, that 
before church courts take action upon import¬ 
ant subjects, they ought to inquire what the 
Cabinet at Washington may wish them to do, 
or what effect such action may have upon 
Government Stocks abroad.” Of the Assem¬ 
bly’s reference to the lessons of Providence, 
this Declaration and Testimony says: “A more 
total abandonment of God’s written word for 
the uncertain light of dark and mysterious, yet 
undeveloped providences, and these to be ex¬ 
pounded by men, it may be, having their un¬ 
derstandings darkened, and for not obeying the 
truth, perchance, given up to believe a lie, can 
scarcely be conceived of. It proclaims 'that 
the usurpation, by the secular and military 
power, of authority in and over the worship 
and government of the Church, has been sanc¬ 
tioned by Sessions, Presbyteries, Synods and 
the General Assembly, directly, by various 
acts fully known to the world, that an alliance 
has been virtually formed by the Church with 


63 


the State, by which the State has been en¬ 
couraged, and even invited to use the Church 
as an instrument for giving effect to its vari¬ 
ous schemes of a political character. It de¬ 
nounces the last five Assemblies as having 
practiced a relentless and malignant persecu¬ 
tion which is sought to be justified by fals8 
statements and misrepresentations. It charges 
the Assembly of 1865 with basing an action 
upon an assertion of what the Assembly had 
the clearest evidence was not true. It declares 
that the deliverances of the Assembly are con¬ 
trary to the word of God and subversive of its 
inspiration and supreme authority. It assures 
the world that our Synods and Assemblies have 
ceased to command even ordinary respect. 
That the Assembly has become the supporter 
of heresy, the abettor of injustice and despot¬ 
ism, the promoter of discord and the prime 
leader in promoting a great and destructive 
schism in the body of Christ. That the in¬ 
fallible oracles of God have been abandoned 
for a shallow humanitarian philanthrophy. 
That the plainest teachings of the Scriptures 
respecting the relation and duty of ^masters 
and servants have been pronounced cruel and 
unjust; and that the whole mediatorial glory 
and dignity of the Messiah have thus been 
tarnished; and all the offices of Prophet, Priest 
and King, which he executes for the salvation 
of his people, are subverted and surrendered, 
and it sums up these weighty and serious 
charges with the declaration that if this be not 
an apostasy, surely it needs but little to make 
it so, clearly, unmistakably, fatally.” 

In view of the things here alleged, and the 
position which the Presbyterian Church is here 
charged with having taken, the authors and 
signers of this Declaration and Testimony, 
“Resolved that they will refuse to give their 
support to ministers, elders, agents, editors, 
teachers, or to those who are in any capacity 
engaged in religious instructisn or effort who 
agree with our late Assemblies. That they 
will not sustain, nor execute, nor in any 
manner asoist in the execution of the orders 
framed at the last two meetings of their As¬ 
sembly, on the subjects of Slavery and Loval- 
ty, and with referenca to the conducting of 
missions in the Southern States, and with re¬ 
gard to ministers, members and churches in the 
seceded and border States.’, The Declaration 
and Testimony was adopted by a majority of 
the Presbytery of Louisville, September 2d, 
1865, and effort made to give it wide circula¬ 
tion through our churches and gain to it the 
adherence of our people. This paper, with the 
act of the Presbytery of Louisville in adopting 
it, being brought to the notice of this Synod 
at its regular meeting, October. 1865, was 
caused to be read in the hearing of the Synod; 
and being considered, the Synod “expressed its 
disapprobation of the terms of it, and of its 
spirit, and intent, indicated upon its face, as 
looking to further agitation of the Church, if 
not its division, at a time when great mutual 
forbearance was called for among brethren.” 


It cannot be too often, nor too distinctly called 
to mind that this Synod has, by large majori¬ 
ties, publicly disapproved the avowed princi¬ 
ples and acts of those amoogst us who have 
been seeking to organize opposition to the 
General Assembly, as often as these have come 
directly under its consideration; and at the 
same time, has “asserted that we will adhere 
with unbroken purpose to the Presbyterian 
Church in the United States of America, and 
will oppose every effort to interrupt our eccle¬ 
siastical relations with the General Assembly, 
or to produce schism or division on the ground 
of said acts and deliverances.” And this Sy - 
nod is confirmed in its past judgment herein 
by the fact that that judgment has been sus¬ 
tained by the wisdom of our whole Church. 
All leading minds, of differents shades of 
opinion touching the matters in question, 
agree as to the nature, character and tenden¬ 
cy of the Declaration and Testimony. The 
committee of the last General Assembly ap¬ 
pointed to examine it, reported in these words: 
“It is not simply an expression of disagree¬ 
ment with the vast majority of the Church on 
the subject of Loyalty and Slavery, nor a public 
protest against what might be regarded as se¬ 
riously erroneous, or unconstitutional in the 
teachings and decisions of the Assembly. It 
is not even a refusal to sustain the General 
Assembly and a renunciation of all obligation 
to support the organization by which the 
Church seeks to maintain and extend the gos¬ 
pel among men; nor is it an act of rebellion 
simply, against the constituted ^ecclesiastical 
authorities to which, in his ordination vow, 
every ^Presbyterian minister has solemnly 
promised obedience in the Lord. But it is an 
organized conspiracy against the honor, the 
pe ce and the unity of that part of (he body of 
Christ in which they still claim the rights and 
privileges of membership. Ii is a violent and 
studied disruption of the Christian bonds 
which they desire to be yet unbroken—a bold 
denial of mutual obligations by men who de¬ 
mand for themselves the full enjoyment of 
covenanted engagements, without the poor 
merit of a rebellion which scorns obedience, 
proudly defies power, and challenges authori¬ 
ty to meet it in deadly conflict.” Even those 
who have undertaken to defend the principles 
of this paper have said of it, “that it contains 
various statements which if taken in their 
literal import, we regard as disrespectful to 
the Assembly, pregnant with schism, and 
adapted to foster a spirit of insubordination 
throughout our bounds.” And all who 
have dispassionately considered it upon its 
own merits, and spoken out their solemn 
judgment, have virtually concurred in what 
has been so well said of this paper in these 
words: “The severity of its language, its 
sweeping assertions, its charges of defection 
and heresy against the supreme judicatory of 
the Church, its condemnation of principles 
and practices coeval with our organization, 
and its avowed schismatical object, offended 


64 


tlie judgment and conscience of the great body 
of our members, ministers and elders. We 
fully sympathize with the disapprobation of 
the spirit, principles and proposed mode of ac¬ 
tion set forth in that document, which has 
been so generally expressed. It is founded, 
from first to last, upon an erroneous theory of 
the office and prerogatives of the Church. A 
theory which was advanced for a purpose, and 
was never acted upon any branch of the Church 
from the beginning. If its doctrines were to 
prevail, a seal would be set on the lips of the 
Church, and she would be forbidden to testify 
against many sins, and to enjoin many duties 
which lie properly within her sphere. The 
signers of the Declaration and Testimony, not 
satisfied with protesting against the acts in 
question, extended most unreasonably their 
denunciations and criminations, and put them¬ 
selves in the position of schismatics, by avow¬ 
ing the purpose of separation and adopting 
the incipient measures for the execution of 
that purpose.” 

The General Assembly of 1866, understand¬ 
ing that the Presbytery of Louisville had, by 
adopting this paper, openly defied its authori¬ 
ty, and refused to submit to its orders : “Re¬ 
solved, that until it should have examined and 
decided upon the conduct of said Presbytery, 
the commissioners thereof should not be enti¬ 
tled to seats in that body; and having exam¬ 
ined the same by committee, the Assembly 
adopted the order that on hearing the matter 
the commissioners from said Presbytery should 
be heard subject to the rules of order which 
govern the Assembly. These commissioners 
took the strange position that they had alrea¬ 
dy been condemned, and that this proposition 
to hear them was an insult and seeming mock¬ 
ery, and refused to make any defense. The 
Assembly disposed of the case by condemning 
the Declaration and Testimony as a slander 
against the Church, schismatical in its char¬ 
acter, and declaring its adoption by any of 
our church courts an act of rebellion against 
the authority of the Assembly, and refering 
the subject to the next General Assembly. 
Summoning the signers of this paper and the 
members of the Louisville Presbytery who vo¬ 
ted to adopt it to appear before the next Gen¬ 
eral Assembly to answer for what they have 
done in this matter—resolving that until their 
case shall have been decided, they shall not 
be permitted to sit as members of any church 
court higher than the Session, and that if any 
Presbytery shall disregard this action, and 
shall at any meeting enroll, as entitled to a 
seat or seats in the body, one or more persons 
designated in the preceding resolutions and 
summoned to appear before the next General 
Assembly, then that Presbytery shall be ipso 
facto dissolved ; and Synods, in making up 
their rolls, shall be guided and governed by 
this action of the General Assembly. For the 
express purpose of showing that it had no 
disposition to act hastily, nor harshly, but 
much ddsired to reach such an adjustment as 


would enable all true Presbyterians to remain 
in union, the General Assembly postponed 
final judgment for twelve months, thus giving 
ample time for reflection, for repentance and 
for defence. But as if fearing that our beloved 
Zion might be favored of her Divine Head 
with wisdom and grace to reach some happy 
conclusion of the case, within this time given 
for consideration, those immediately commit¬ 
ted to the Declaration and Testimony and 
summoned to answer for what they have done, 
in order to give their conduct the semblance 
of reason and justification, began afresh the 
work of agitation and strife, giving new in¬ 
terpretations to our Standards and teaching 
false theories and views of the fundamental 
principles of Presbyterianism—principles 
which our Church has never received nor 
sanctioned, as to the true Constitution of the 
Church and the powers of her courts—virtu¬ 
ally finding the defense of their conduct in 
the upturning of every valuable principle of 
our Presbyterian system. 

Also, others of our own nnmber, prepared 
and signed a paper and addressed it to “the 
Presbyterian people of Kentucky,” and by 
means of it sought to organize conspiracy 
against the authority of the General Assem¬ 
bly, and in the interest and behalf of those 
who were under process of discipline before 
the General Assembly—making vigorous ef¬ 
forts to induce the entire Church in Kentucky 
to commit herself to open resistance to the 
authority of the Assembly, and persisting in 
efforts to turn away the hearts of our people 
from the Church of our fathers—the Church 
of our choice—and the Church of our love— 
and these efforts have culminated in schism in 
the body of this Synod. For, when this Sy¬ 
nod met at its last regular meeting in the city 
of Henderson, 7 o’clock P. M., Oct. 10, 1866, 
and was constituted with prayer by the Mod¬ 
erator, Rev. R. L. Breck, our State t Clerk, 
Rev. S. S. McRoberts, proceeded to discharge 
his constitutional duties, and calling the roll 
of the members, according to the order of the 
last General Assembly, and omitting the 
names of such as were under the discipline of 
the Church—as not entitled to seats—the 
Moderator, being of those who had publicly 
and in the prints of the day counseled the 
Church in Kentucky to disobedience to the 
Assembly’s orders, virtually ordered the 
Stated Clerk to disregard said orders and call 
the names of all those whom the Assembly had 
indicated as not entitled to seats in Synod. 
Our Stated Clerk positively refused to obey 
the Moderator, urging that the order of the 
General Assembly forbade his doing so. The 
Moderator then, in the exercise of power, at 
once unconstitutional, arbitrary and tyran¬ 
nical, also defiant of the authority of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly, and regardless of the mind 
and judgment of the wisest members of Sy- 
nod. who were seeking to arrest his unlawful 
proceedure, by suggestion, argument and pro¬ 
test, did assume to decide in his own right 


65 


who were the lawful members of the Synod; 
did assume tn decide in his own right, whether 
or not the orders of the last Assembly should 
be obeyed by the Synod—being backed up by 
the unseemly public clamour, made by persons 
designedly present in order to act public 
clamour and violence in support of the Mod¬ 
erator’s decision, that the order of the General 
Assembly should not be obeyed. Being sus¬ 
tained by such as have been notoriously in 
sympathy with the Declaration and Testimony 
and all forms of rebellion in Church and State, 
the Moderator made up a roll, which, wl en 
finished, contained only the names of such as 
had sighed the Declaration and Testimony, 
and such as had conspired to prevent the ex¬ 
ecution of the orders of the General Assem¬ 
bly by this Synod. These disorderly persons 
having adjourned their unlawful body; the 
members of the Synod of Kentucky took up 
their business, at the point where it had been 
interrupted by the retiring Moderator, and 
completed the roll according to the order of 
Assembly and proceeded to its proper busi¬ 
ness. So that those, whose language in the 
Declaration and Testimony has been under¬ 
stood and adjudged, by the wise and good, to 
mean slander of the Church and of the breth¬ 
ren, and who have been convicted by the pub¬ 
lic wisdom of the Church of her teaching false 
theories of the nature of the Church and her 
divine commission, being held by the Church 
to the responsibility of their own teachings 
and acts, instead of embracing the opportu¬ 
nity which the summons of the Assembly gave 
them to put themselves right before the Church 
and make a good defence of their own Decla¬ 
ration and Testimony, seems to have placed 
themselves in the attitude of having shrunk 
from their own words, and fled from the re¬ 
sponsibility to which their own public declara¬ 
tions bold them. 

The Lord has called upon us to build tho 
walls of Zion in a time of trouble: in a time 
when the judgments and feelings of our peo¬ 
ple are much divided, and when the lamenta¬ 
tion comes up from all parts of our field, that 
these things are obstructing the progress of 
grace and truth in our midst—and even hind¬ 
ering the children of the Church from enjoying 
the stated means of grace. 

In these things we recognize a call to hu¬ 
miliation btfjre God, and earnest strivings 
for the appearance of the Holy Ghost amongst 
us. “God, for his own wise purposes, seems 
to have ordained a futlier period of agitation 
and trial for the Church, for its good and his 
own glory.” We implore in behalf of this 
Synod, and in behalf of all under its spiritual 
care, grace, mercy, and peace from God, that 
we may be enabled to discern his will and be 
faithful in our duties to our Redeemer. “How 
hath the Lord covered the daughter of Zion 
with a cloud in his anger I Remember, 0 
Lord, what is come upon us.” 


Action of the Separatists at Henderson. 

We have received a copy of what purports 
to be “Minutes of the Synod of Kentucky, 
held at Henderson.” To this is appended an 
epistle of the s»-called Synod to the churches 
and people under its charge. It was agreed to 
publish 2,500 copies of the Minutes, including 
the said epistle or Pastoral Address. So we 
suppose these papers have been scattered 
broadcast over ilie State. Many statements in 
them, rather mis statements, deserve severe 
animadverson. To a few of these we now ad¬ 
vert; at another time others may receive at¬ 
tention. 

Among the grave charges alleged against 
the last General Assembly, is “the proposal for 
the removal of the Danville Theological Semi¬ 
nary.” This is but. a repetition of what is 
said on the same point in the Address to the 
Presbyterian people of Kentucky, issued last 
summer by the junto which met in secret con¬ 
clave in Lexington—only the statement there 
is still more inaccurate. The Lexington man¬ 
ifesto says, “with the proposition to remove 
from us the Theological Seminary.” The sub¬ 
stratum of fact upon which this allegation 
rests, is on a par with much more of that ex¬ 
tremely candid, pious, and moderate document. 
Now what did the Assembly do? Accepting 
the resignations of the other professors, it re¬ 
quested Dr. R. J. Breckinridge to retain his 
professorship, and authorized him “to confer 
with the trustees of the College, and with the 
Synod of Kentucky, as to the conditions upon 
which they will agree to the removal of the 
Seminary from Danville, and report to the 
next General Assembly.” This action gives a 
coloring of truth, nothing more, to what is 
said by the separatists about the removal of 
the Seminary. The mere mooting of the ques¬ 
tion, the simple authorization of Dr. Breckin¬ 
ridge to confer with the Trustees of the Col¬ 
lege, and with the Synod, as to the conditions 
upon which they will agree to a change of lo¬ 
cation, is construed into a proposition to re¬ 
move the Seminary from us. The impression 
is made that the Assembly designs to wrong 
us, to disregard its covenants with the Col¬ 
lege and the Synod; yet all the Assembly di- 
was to appoint Dr. B. to ascertain upon what 
conditions the contracting parties in Ken¬ 
tucky would agree to a removal; and if these 
parties should so agree, what blame could at¬ 
tach to the Assembly? and what harm, in any 
event, in a simple proposal to remove? An 
impartial mind cannot fail to detect in thi3 
perversion of the Assembly’s action, a trump¬ 
ing up of charges—a hunting after something 
wherewith to fire the Southern heart against 
the Northern Assembly. But the proposition is 
not only to remove the Seminary, but to re¬ 
move it fromus , says the Lexington manifested 
that is, if from us means anything outside of 
the limits of the Synod of Kentucky. When, 
where, by whom, was such a proposition 
made? Certainly not by the General Assem¬ 
bly. To remove from Danville does not neces- 


66 


sarily imply to remove out. of Kentucky. This 
odious from us is an addition totally unwar¬ 
ranted. The minute of the Assembly, especi¬ 
ally when interpreted in the light of the well- 
known origin and history of a project just 
thrown out for consideration, does not give 
even the coloring of truth to this part of the 
charge. We feel quite safe in affirming that 
the idea of removing the Seminary out of 
Kentucky, has never been seriously enter¬ 
tained by anyone; certain it is the Assembly 
is not responsible for even meditating such a 
thing. The whole charge, from beginning to 
end, is a rare specimen of case-making. Gen¬ 
tlemen who conspicuously affect candor, fair 
dealing, and “superior moderation,” ought to 
walk softly. 

Certain papers offered for the consideration 
of the so-called Synod, one by Mr. Rout, the 
other by Dr. Robinson, were referred to a com¬ 
mittee, ,of which the Rev. R. L, Greek was 
chairman. At a subsequent stage of the pro¬ 
ceedings, Mr. Breck made a report which was 
adopted, item by item, and then adopted as a 
whole. This report is the most important pa¬ 
per passed on by the new and novel organiza¬ 
tion, because thereby its present status and 
policy are determined. It is a marvellously 
queer paper, too, as would naturally be in¬ 
ferred from the various little factions making 
up the factious whole, cemented together by a 
common hostility to the righteous judgments 
of the highest court of the Lord’s house. It 
required no mean degree of skill in the game 
of fast and loose in drawing this pronuncia- 
mento, as well as the Pastoral Address, to 
adapt it to “every shade of opinion * in the 
Bynod.” In this respect it does well. It is 
an improvement upon some other specimens 
of wordy legerdemain we wot. In guaging 
the posture of this new and self-constituted 
Synod, the future ecclesiastical historian, 
guided by the steady light of Mr. Breck's re¬ 
port, will take his stand on that interesting 
locality known as Point-no-point. With such 
a light and such a point of observation, he 
will have no difficulty in determining the 
mi tes and bounds, the plans and purposes of 
the Henderson Synod; but the report is not 
only an important one, a queer one, a remark¬ 
ably lucid and clever one; is a very proper 
one as well—no, proper is not the word; it is 
an exceedingly dignified report. Indeed, its 
dignity surpasses even its lucidity and clever¬ 
ness. But the great Homer sometimes nods, 
and the 6un has its spots. If we might ven¬ 
ture an adverse criticism, we would say this 
Synodal paper is a little too dignified. I re¬ 
minds one of what a wit remarked some years 
since of the English Church— it is like to die of 
dignity. Its stateliness is freezing; it also 
borders close upon the supercilious. A preju¬ 
diced person might call it superbly supercili¬ 
ous. There is another slight blemish upon this 
deliverance to which we humbly direct the 
attention of the Synodal fathers and brethren. 
A friendly hint may lead to amendment here¬ 


after. It is a small spot ’tis true, yet easily 
discernable without aid of optic glass. Wc 
mean the air of self-complacency which runs 
through the performance. On reading it over 
with becoming care and veneration, the open¬ 
ing sentence of Dr. Joseph Addison Alexan¬ 
der’s review of Colton on Episcopacy, occurred 
to us with surprising freshness. “Coleridge 
tells us of a man who never spoke of himself 
without first taking off his hat.” Regard for 
self, delight in self-exalted notions of the part 
self has to play, the vast influence sell will 
exert in the world—these crop out rather too 
prominently. “ This Synod;" u the Synod ;” “this 
bodyfi looms up in grand proportions before 
the eye of self. The Spartans birched their 
children, not because they stole, but because 
they were detected in the theft. The brethren 
who met at Henderson ought to have remem¬ 
bered the frailty of poor human nature. We 
all think well of ourselves—we do not blame 
them for that. But just because we do think 
well of ourselves—perhaps too highly—we do 
not like to see others distend themselves too 
proudly. It offends our self-esteem. It is un¬ 
wise, therefore, to thrust the sense we cherish 
of our own importance before the eyes of men. 
They do not blame us for feeling big, for 
thinking big things are in us, and will come 
out of us, for magnifying in our own hearts 
the high destiny before us; but they have no 
patience with us when we allow ourselves to 
be detected in these little sillinesses; much 
less when we vain-gloriously parade them in 
the face of the sun. 

The new Synod affects the roll of mediator. 
“It is the purpose of this body to shape action 
with reference to that desire, [« re-union under 
the General Assembly of all sound Presbyterians ] 
and to the fact that, in the Providence of God, 
this body stands in a position towards both 
sections of the Church, which specially quali¬ 
fies it for the work of mediation between them.” 
No doubt of it; some individuals and some 
bodies think themselves qualified for any¬ 
thing. This statement calls not so much for 
animadversion, as it awakens disgust or pro¬ 
vokes laughter, according to the state of a 
man’s digestive apparatus. As for ourselves, 
having digested well a moderate breakfast, we 
feel inclined to laugh at it. It presents itself 
to our mind as farsical to the last degree. 
Seize the ludicrous idea, and meditate it. Here 
is a little knot of a hundred ministers and 
elders, about the hundreth partof those in the 
Church they profess to belong to; in manifest 
schism, yet claiming to he an integral part of 
the Old School 1 Presbyterian Church ; denounc¬ 
ing that Church in the most virulent manner 
through their accredited organ, in private, in 
public discourses, in public addresses; revil¬ 
ing the immense majority of its members as 
radicals, as jacobins, half-way infidels, and 
what not; scoffing at its supreme tribunal as 
corrupt, tyrannical, heedless of the commonest 
principles of justice and humanity, on the 
very verge of apostasy from the faith'of God’s 


67 


elect—these, these men talk of their special 
qualification for the work of mediation. Did 
a more insane idea ever enter the head of a 
bedlamite? Special mediatorial qualifications 
of a body whose leaders are to-day under ac¬ 
tual process for slander, rebellion and schism! 
Well, this is a grotesque, indeed. For, be it 
observed, the object of the mediation is to 
bring about a re-union under the General As¬ 
sembly of the Presbyterian Church in the 
United States of America. That they do pos¬ 
sess certain qualifications so far as one of the 
disatfeoted parties is concerned, no man can 
deny. W T ho does not know that the “Southern 
Churches are understood to sympathise fully 
with this Synod,” and that “this Synod” sym¬ 
pathises fully with those Churches ? And who 
does not understand that a straight-forward, 
honest policy required “this Synod” to cast in 
its lot at once with those Churches, just as Dr. 
Robinson urged in one of the interlocutory 
meetings ? Rut what on earth could have sug¬ 
gested to any member of “this Synod” that 
they were qualified to mediate at all between 
the grand old Church they have maligned, and 
anybody else? Genius and insanity are said 
to be separated by a narrow boundary. The 
inventions of the one, and the fantastic com¬ 
binations of the other, puzzle alike a plain 
understanding. We leave it to a greater psy¬ 
chologist than we, to determine whether the 
notion of “this Synod’s’’ mediation be a pro¬ 
duct of genius or of insanity. But this work 
of mediation on the part of these gentlemen of 
“superior moderation,” says the report is to be 
between the two “sections of the Church.” 
Sections of what Church ? Our Church is a 
compact body. There are no sections of it, 
unless the quiddity , that undefinable something 
constituted at Henderson, be a section. What 
that body is, and whether in the Church or out 
of the Church, are questions in hot debate. 
We say they are out, they say they are in. 
Perhaps the best solution ad interim , is to con¬ 
sider them a section, a fragment not complete¬ 
ly severed as yet from the great mass. Do 
they consider the Presbyterian Church in the 
United States , as our old associates of the South 
call their recent organization, a section of our 
Church? That, too, is a compact body, one 
Church, with the appointments of a distinct 
denomination. The report indeed speaks of 
the “Southern Churches,” as if these were 
small bodies of Christian people lying around 
looso; whereas they have been constituted into 
one body. There are no sections of it—unless 
“this Synod”.be a section of the said Church; 
for it is of it, though not in it. We find, then, 
two distinct Churches, not two sections of one 
Church. The only thing answering to a section 
seems to be “this Synod,” and it a section of 
both Churches. It is in the one, as it claims, 
though not of it; it is of the other, yet not in 
it. It must be a section, and an odd section, 
too; but where are the sections between which 
it proposes to mediate? They”are purely im¬ 
aginary. Still we are not a little curious to 


see the work of mediation begin. When it is 
over, whatever it be, the readers of the min¬ 
utes of “this Synod” will take up the old ditty: 
“Parturient monies , nascitur ridiculus mus,” It 
will prove as abortive even as it is absurd, as 
the Kentucky mediation at the outset of the 
rebellion. The gulf that now separates the 
two denominations, is too broad and too deep 
to be bridged overby such workmen. More¬ 
over, that gulf is, in no small degree, the work 
of their own hands. 

The terms used in this part of the report, as 
we have seen, are foolish and deceptive; but 
there is an idea , partially concealed, indeed, 
but discoverable on a little scrutiny. That 
idea is this: Play the fast and loose game as 
long as practicable; though in defiant rebel¬ 
lion against the Church, hang on; gather up 
as many as possible of the “conservative min¬ 
isters and people in the Northern Assembly,” 
and then strike a bee-line for the Southern 
Assembly. That is the kind of mediation we 
are to look for. Dr. Robinson, bold and dash¬ 
ing as he is, wished to go at once; but his com¬ 
peers over-ruled him. They wished to mediate 
awhile. 

We close with calling attention to the follow¬ 
ing statement in Mr. Breck’s report: “On the 
other hand, this Synod has held that the 
Southern Churches, being driven into a sepa¬ 
ration from us by the unwise and unconstitu¬ 
tional acts of our General Assembly, and by 
circumstances beyond their control, are, there¬ 
fore, not schismatical.” We were amazed 
when we first read these words, and immedi¬ 
ately examined carefully the minutes of the 
Synod of Kentucky for ’61, ’03, ’64, and ’65. 
(There was no meeting in 1802, but two in 
1863.) When and where, we ask, did the 
Synod hold that doctrine? w§ affirm it has 
held directly the opposite, and make the issue 
squarely with Mr. Breck and his Synod. The 
only deliverance the Synod of Kentucky ever 
made upon the matter now in question, was in 
1861. It is in these words: 

(2.) “ The schism which followed the action of 
the Assembly. This Synod deplores the schism 
which has occurred in those States in which, 
as before said, it was impossible for the Pres¬ 
byterian people to keep the day of prayer or¬ 
dered by the Assembly. While, in this de¬ 
plorable schism, this Synod sees a sad proof 
of the want of wisdom in that action of the 
Assembly, which has been a chief pretext of 
it, it decidedly condemns the schism itself, as 
being without sufficient justification, and in 
its results, portentious of incalculable evil.” 

Now here is an express deliverance of the 
Synod’s judgment of the conduct of the South¬ 
ern Presbyterians. It is clear and emphatic. 
The Synod says it decidedly condemns the schism 
as being without sufficient justification. Mr. 
Breck and his associates affirm that the Synod 
has held that the Southern Cnurches are not 
schismatical. Let him reconcile these proposi¬ 
tions who can. Moreover, what Mr. Breck’s 
report affirms the Synod has held as a justifi- 


68 


cation of the schism, the Synod itself calls a 
pretext, and declares the schism without justi- 
cation. We content ourselves with contrast¬ 
ing the statement of Mr. B.'s report with the 
deliverance of Synod at Harrodsburg. Com¬ 
ment is unnecessary. If the Synod has held 
a doctrine different from that asserted at Har¬ 
rodsburg, let it be shown, and we will ac¬ 
knowledge publicly our ignorance of the re¬ 
cord. Honestas 


u To the Presbyterian People of Kentucky .” 

An address of about eleven pages, bearing 
the title given above, has been circulated with¬ 
in the bounds of the Synod of Kentucky. It 
is signed by fifty-five persons, ministers, and 
ruling elders, most of whom belong to the Pres¬ 
bytery of West Lexington. The author of it is 
not known to the public. This is, however, a 
matter of small moment: the signers of it are 
the responsible parties. The document itself 
is by no means a formidable one, and is destin¬ 
ed, we presume, to make but little impression 
upon the minds of the “Presbyterian people of 
Kentucky,” it is feeble and vapid in style, be¬ 
traying upon the part of the writer an utter 
deficiency in those high qualities of composi¬ 
tion, without which the best thoughts fall 
powerless upon the ear. There are no “wing¬ 
ed words;” no barbed arrows; nothing sharp, 
clear, terse. It is a dull, sluggish, turbid 
stream of words—a muddy brook flowing 
through a flat alluvian, whose current, whether 
North or Sonth, can scarce be discriminated. 
The popular mind is not aroused by an ad¬ 
dress of this order. The heart is in sympathy 
with the mountain torrent, clear and sparkling, 
leaping, dashing, rushing to its appointed 
goal. This paper presents a singular lack of 
the art of condensation, the power of present¬ 
ing a case in a series of succint, luminous 
statements. In this respect it is in marvelous 
contrast with the one which the Rev. J. E. 
Spilman and Chas. A. Masliall, Esq., lately 
put forth. Whether its views, therefore, be 
correct or incorrect, its counsels wise or fool¬ 
ish, we do not think it will exert an appreci¬ 
able influence on the questions at issue. The 
brethren who met at Lexington, were not happy 
in their spokesman. An unskillful leader 
damages the best of causes; and when a man 
aspires to the position of a leader, or is put 
forward as such by h s fellows, it should be 
carefully considered by both him and them 
whether he has the requisite endowments. 
The moulding of public sentiment demands the 
hand of a master. The work of a bungler is 
no where more apparent than just here. To 
lead men, to lead them successfully, is a rare 
gift. A mere ambition to lead neither implies 
nor developesthe power. A man may succeed 
well in the quiet walks of the pastoral care; 
he may train the ycung with a clever degree 
of skill, yet prove totally insufficient 10 grapple 
witii strong men in times of high excitement. 
Tc convince the judgment, to sway the.passions, 


to form the opinions of earnest men at an hour 
when church and country both are rocked to 
their foundations—this is no child’s play, no 
place for any but a strong, a delicate, and a 
dexterous hand. Longspun platitudes of un¬ 
supported assumption^ inconsequental reason¬ 
ings, and feeble exhortations, do not reach the 
mark. Never in the history of our Church was 
there a more imperious call than now for 
masters of sentences , as well as clear heads and 
stouts hearts. The brethren who met at Lex¬ 
ington were not happy in their selection (or 
their acceptance?) of a leader. 

Considered as an argument , if indeed it can 
be admitted to rise to the dignity of an argu¬ 
ment, this paper is one of the loosest and most 
illogical we have met with during the recent 
discussions in the Church. It is made up of 
gratuitous assumptions, unwarranted infer¬ 
ences, and the grossest forms of the petitio 
principii. The wonder is that so many respect¬ 
able and educated gentlemen could be induced 
to attach their names to it. And the explanation 
of this, we suppose, is to be found in fact that 
they agreed, m >re or less heartily, in the policy 
proposed, and did not stop to observe the raw 
and unkillful drawing of the paper. Consid¬ 
ered as an appeal to the Christian conscience, 
it is lamer, if possible, than in its attempts at 
reasoning. If there is little brains in it, there' 
i 3 still less heart. Whoever the writer may be, 
it is evident his strength does not lie in this 
line The truth is, no man can awaken the 
profounder and nobler emotions of the human 
soul who is incapable of them himself. He 
must be more than a pious man; for faith may 
exist as a grain of mustard-seed. He must be 
a man of generous, tender sensibilities—in 
sweetest sympathy with what is purest and 
loveliest in our renewed natures. None other 
can sweep the chords and “wake to ecstacy the 
living lyre.” The futile attempts of others 
expose them to ridicule. Placid self-esteem, 
and cool audacity, may effect much even on 
important occasions, and in assemblies of able 
men. These may induce persons of quite 
ordinary talents to essay great things, and 
with favoring circumstances, may enable them 
to achieve wonders. Men of real merit and 
capacity are generally slow to put themselves 
forward. They have greatness thrust upon 
them. They do not affect conspicuous station, 
they are forced into it. They are fitted for it, 
and without self-seeking fall heir to it. But 
self-esteem and audacity are not associated 
with profound emotion and tender sensibility; 
and these cannot be successfully counterfeited. 
Poeia nascitur, non fit. A man must be endow¬ 
ed by nature with a susceptibility of pure and 
deep emotion himself if he would excite it in 
the breasts of others. Stimulated pathos is all 
in vain; and both hateful and ludicrous be¬ 
sides. The pretender, too, is sure to be re¬ 
marked. Our author is no exception. His cold, 
cautious, calculating nature, is quite apparent 
to a discerning reader. His sighing and la¬ 
mentation awaken no response. In short, we 



69 


consider his effort, regarded as addressed either 
to the understanding or to the heart, an egreg¬ 
ious failure. We are confident this will be the 
judgment of all parties. 

A word or two of criticism would not be out 
of place on the air of moderation and judicial 
calmness assumed in this little pamphlet; but 
let that pass. A great leader in a great crisis 
may legitimately claim justice cum grano salis. 
We turn now to the spirit, the animus , pervad¬ 
ing this paper. There is no difficulty in dis¬ 
covering it. Those who attended and watched 
the proceedings of the Synod at Danville, in 
1864, will at once detect it. Indeed this pa¬ 
per reveals clearly what was only cautiously 
insinuated in speeches made on the floor of 
that Synod. The last paragraph tells the 
whole story. “Behold how good and how 
pleasant for brethren to dwell together in 
unity” ! But the unity aimed at is that of the 
Synod of Kentucky , not of the Presbyterian 
Church in the United States of America. 
“Severance from a venerable Assembly which 
in time past we have regarded with perhaps 
sinful pride,” would be “painful.” No doubt 
of it; but that may be endured, the writer 
thinks, provided the Synod can be held to¬ 
gether. A division of the Synod, and division 
of our churches, would be calamitous; but 
separation from the church of our fathers in 
which we were born, and in which we have 
lived to this present hour, would be still more 
calamitous. The unity of the Synod upon the 
basis oj adherence to the General Assembly , to 
the whole Church ,—this is our motto; for this 
we have labored and do labor still; for this 
we have made sacrifices even to the verge of 
our profoundest convictions of truth and duty. 
Here we stand, and here we intend to stand. 
The Presbyterian Church, not the Synod of Ken¬ 
tucky, is the body of Christ to us. If any 
propose to make a schism in that body, let 
them do it; but they must excuse us for de¬ 
clining to become partakers of their sin. If 
any are determined to go out of the Church, 
to assume an independent position, either tem¬ 
porary or permanent, or to unite with the 
Southern Assembly, the door is open, but we 
cannot follow them. Our doctrine is, preserve 
our Church relations intact all round —in the 
individual church, in the Synod, in the entire 
body. This is true conservatism. If wrong 
has been done, let it be righted; but we deny 
that sufficient cause has arisen, or is likely to 
arise, for sundering any of our existing re¬ 
lations. If extreme men are bent on radical 
measures, we shall take no part with them. 
If the integrity of the church is destroyed, the 
responsibility shall not rest on our shoulders. 
If the ploughshare of division is run through 
our congregations, we shall not drive it. Let 
them bear the blame who are striving to tear 
these congregations away from their old moor¬ 
ings. We shall stand still, and urge others to 
do likewise. We revere the Synod of Ken¬ 
tucky, but we revere the whole church more. 
The fellowship of God’s people in our whole 


communion is dear to us. We repudiate the 
idea of setting up a little independent con¬ 
cern in the State of Kentucky, cut off from 
organic union with the thousands of Israel. We 
are asked to sever ourselves from the great 
Synods North and East of us—Baltimore, 
Philadelphia, New York, New Jersey; from all 
the institutions of the great Church which we 
have hitherto delighted to call ours, and in 
whose bosom we have found salvation; from 
all participation in the goodly heritage laid up 
for us by our fathers. And all for what? To 
stand out in the cold by ourselves! This is 
the fare to which we are invited. “If our 
present connection with the General Church 
shall fail us, it is our purpose, as we fear God, 
to have it no fault of ours; and we propose to 
seek no other.” Well, that is silly. Propose 
to seek no other! Do you not believe in the 
communion of saints? Do y r ou wish to isolate 
yourselves? Better than this were it for you 
to unite at once with the Southern Assembly. 
Thither you are gravitating; and there, as you 
well know, the hearts of some of you are now 
and have been for years past. Why stop at a 
half-way house? If you cannot co-operate 
with our Assembly, go into that other—unless, 
perchance, you prefer the New School. But 
go somewhere; go where you can be contented, 
happy, and useful ( ; where you will not be eter¬ 
nally chafed by the ecclesiastical misdeeds of 
Yankees, Radicals, and Abolitionists, Go 
where you can live in peace and spend your 
strength in building up Zion, instead of being 
obliged to waste your energies in a fruitless 
war. If, after having entered up your protest 
against what you conceive to be wrong, you 
cannct stand quietly in your lot and work 
with the old Church, go elsewhere. It will be 
better for your own souls, better for the cause 
of Christ. Let us have rest. We do not wish 
to part with you, but wc cannot go with you; 
we cannot leave the old homestead; we cannot 
forsake the fellowship of our brethren num¬ 
bered by hundreds of thousands all over this 
broad land. You must not ask us to break 
the unity of the Church, to divide the body of 
Christ, even to please you. We cennot do it. 
The platform you ask us to stand on is too nar¬ 
row. What! give up the Presbyterian Church 
in the United States of America for a little in¬ 
dependent organization in the central region 
of Kentucky—a mere abortion of a church ! 
Oh, no, brethren—do not do it yourselves. It 
is folly. Better, we say again, is it for you to 
go at once into the Southern Assembly. And 
we verily believe you would find more to fol¬ 
low you in that exodus than in theone you are 
now endeavoring to inaugurate. 

But you say further—“we would still await 
in hope the time when the Assembly shall re¬ 
turn to its ancient conservative and scriptural 
faith, and juster mode of dealing with its faith¬ 
ful constituents.” That is to say, you will go 
out and wait to see what is to come. On the 
other hand, we prefer to wait in the house of 
the Lord, and to inquire in his holy temple. 


70 


Ve do not conceive of the Church as a mere 
voluntary society, into and out of which we 
can go at pleasure. Within its sacred pre¬ 
cincts we were born; within them we hope to 
die. When our Church shall have aposta'ized 
from the faith of Christ’s elect, the warning 
voice of the Master will be heard, saying 
“Come out of her my people.” We have not 
heard that voice yet, and therefore cannot go 
out. If that word has sounded in your ears 
obey it. It has not reached unto us : we must 
stand in our lot. With charity towards all, 
with malice towards none, as God gives us 
light to see the right, we pursue it; as He 
gives us light to see the wrong, we strive to 
correct it in a lawful way. But for radical, 
revolutionary measures, such as you propose, 
we have no affinity. As a citizen of the 
United States, which we esteem as a far high¬ 
er priviledge than to be a citizen of Kentucky, 
we denied the right and opposed the policy of 
secession; as a citizen of the Christian com¬ 
monwealth, the Church, we deny the right and 
oppose the policy of our Synod’s seceding from 
that illustrious body with which we have al¬ 
ways been associated. Under its jurisdiction 
we have enjoved God’s blessing. Ask us not 
to risk the forfeituro of that blessing. 

Our sympathies and attachments are boun¬ 
ded by no narrow synodical lines. The ap¬ 
peal made to our State pride could not drag 
us into the horrible vortex of secession and 
rebellion : your appeal to us to aid you in 
preserving the unity of the Synod by an act 
of disobedience to the Church in its exercise 
of righteous discipline, will be equally ineffec¬ 
tual. The men who have signed the “Decla¬ 
ration and Testimony” ought to be disciplined, 
and the General Assembly is the proper tri¬ 
bunal to do it. “Painful,” you say, “as would 
be the severance”—that is lrom the Assembly 
—“still more violent to our feelings would 
be an abandonment of the Synod.” Have 
you entertained the idea of abandoning the 
Synod ? Such a thought has never entered 
our heads. Abandon the Synod! Never! 
Let others do as they will, as for us we shall 
hold fast to the Synod, the good old Synod, 
of Kentucky in connection with the General 
Assembly. We have not the remotest idea 
of going into another. “Those who purpose 
to pursue other and violent courses, will on¬ 
ly wound and distract,” but shall not sljake 
us from this “holy purpose.” 

In a subsequent article, we propose to con¬ 
sider some of the many remarkable statements 
and reasonings in this illy digested address, 
and to point out a practicable way whereby 
the evils of divisions may be avoided at least 
for the present, and the unity of the Synod as 
now constituted be preserved. 

A True Presbyterian. 


We have now closed our re.ord of official 
documents. What follows is taken from the 
columns of the Western Presbyterian , partly 
editorial, but mainly contributed by different 
brethren, on various points in the controversy 
between “the General Assembly and its Accu¬ 
sers. We have inserted all along, in connec¬ 
tion with official papers, articles similarly se¬ 
lected, where the discussion turned mainly 
upon the points involved in the matter of the 
records with which they are connected. The 
articles given below will require no explana¬ 
tion or comment. They explain themselves* 
Many of them were by men justly regarded as 
among the ablest writers in the Church. 

The Church of God . 

Its various courts and the powers of them. 

If there was but one Church on earth, it 
would posses all that the universal Church 
would posses, if it embraced the whole family 
of man; numbers only would be increased, the 
government, the office bearers, the members, 
the tribunal, the nature of Church power being 
the same. On the one hand the unity of the 
whole Church, on the other the efficacy of every 
particular element of it is perfectly secured : 
and all that is lacking is some application of 
this wonderful organization, by which a tri¬ 
bunal like that in the congregation, shall ex¬ 
ist for the whole of the Church considered as 
one, and tribunals like both of these shall ex¬ 
ist between the first and the last, the smallest 
and the greatest, as necessity may demand. 
This 1 will now explain. * * * 

It is by toe union of many of fhes^ particu¬ 
lar congregations, with their tribunals, and 
by the erection ot a tribunal over the united 
body, similar to the one that exists in each of 
them; that the Church preserves its outward 
unity, and extends its government as its own 
area enlarges, and its members increase. It 
is immaterial what the number of these united 
congregations may be, three, a hundred, or 
any convenient number. The model of this 
application of the principles of the government 
already existed from the origin of the Church, 
probably in every large city, certainly in Je- 
lusalem, Antioch and others; where numerous 
unfixed congregations, although worshipping 
statedly apart, belonged fora time to the same 
organized Church under the control of its sin¬ 
gle but numerous tribunal. So that the tran¬ 
sition to a similar union of the numerous fixed 
and organized congregations, and the erection 
of a tribunal over them all which should be 
exactly like the tribunal of each, indeed, con¬ 
stituted by uniting the whole of the particular 
tribunals or a select portion of each one* was 
a perfectly obvious mode by which the united 
congregations might have mutual counsel and 
assistance, might more effectually preserve 


71 


the doctrine and execute the discipline of the 
Church, might preserve the organic unity of 
the whole as the body of Christ of which all 
are parts, and might augment by union of 
counsel and effort the efficient working of the 
whole in perfecting and extending the King¬ 
dom of God. What is asserted is, that this 
part of the Organization of the Church, which 
seems to be so natural, so obvious, and so wise, 
is also Apostolical and divine; that this union 
of congregations is as thoroughly according to 
the will of God, as the union of individuals in¬ 
to congregations is; and the control of the 
tribnnal of the united congregations as real 
over all the congregations and all their special 
tribunals, as the rule of each particular tribu¬ 
nal is over the congregation in which it is 
erected. * * * -» * 

The union of any number of classical Pres¬ 
byteries as such, three, fifty, a hundred, crea¬ 
tes a Synod covering them all; composed of 
the same office bearers organized in the same 
way, and with the same power and jurisdic¬ 
tion over all, that each had over part. By 
taking the members of this third court or Sy¬ 
nod immediately from the first one or Church 
session, it may be made a very numerous bo¬ 
dy ; or by taking them from the second court, 
or Presbytery strictly so called, and applying 
the principle of representation of the whole 
Presbytery by a small part of its members, 
the Synod may be a very small body. It is 
perfectly suitable therefore, either to be the 
permanent head of a denomination of Chris¬ 
tians, or of a national Church; or to be one of 
a series of tribunals, the supreme one of which 
shall be above it. The scriptural warrant for 
this tribunal has been as fully set forth, and 
its nature as fully considered, in the examina¬ 
tion I have already made of the Synod consti¬ 
tuted at Jerusalem concerning Gentile Circum¬ 
cision, as my limits permit. And now, sup¬ 
posing the extent of the Church in any way, 
or its interests of any sort, to demand a tribu¬ 
nal still higlior than the Synod, the same divine 
organizat ion and principles apply perfectly,and 
with the same result: and a universal council 
of any number of Churches can be constituted 
for a special purpose ; or a General Assembly 
of any separate Church, whither denomination¬ 
al or national, can be constituted as a perma¬ 
nent tribunal, without departing in the least 
particular from the divine model, or from the 
divine precepts. If the General Assembly is 
to be numerous, that is effected by making the 
Presbyters who compose it the representatives 
of Presbyteries: if it is to be comparatively 
small, that is effected by making the Presby¬ 
ters who compose it the representatives of 
Synods. It is the tribunal of the whole 
Chnrch; it is the whole Church in one Assem¬ 
bly by its office bearers, exactly as a Church 
session is aparticular Church met by its office 
bearers ; and the jurisdiction and power of the 
supreme tribunal over all, are of the same na¬ 
ture and have the same divine warrant as the 
jurisdiction and the power of the tribunals be¬ 


low it over,the parts which they respectively 
rule. Tke goverment of the Church, therefore 
is a free representatives goverment: it is not 
a tyrauny like popery, ncr an oligarchy like 
Prelacy, nor a pure democracy like Indepen¬ 
dency. It is in its conception perfect no matter 
how small: perfect, no matter how widely ex¬ 
panded : perfect at every intermediate a point 
between a small company and the whole race 
of man.—[Dr. Breckinridge's Theology, vol. 
ii., Chapter 31] 


The Power of the General Assembly. 

Mr. Editor: In a preceding article I proved 
by documents which are wholly unanswerable, 
that, historically, the General Assembly did 
not originate with the Presbyteries. I had 
then proposed to myself to consider, in another 
article, the extent and origin of its power. 
Since sending my first article to the Western 
Presbyterian, I have read with greater or less 
attention, Dr. Wilson’s speech, the document 
issued by a convention held at Lexington, and 
the Report—so called—of the Commissioners 
to the last Assembly from the Presbytery of 
Ebenezer. I have also seen the article of Dr. 
Ilodge in the Biblical Repertory for July. A 
perusal of these documents may cause me to 
give to the discussion of the topic under con¬ 
sideration, a somewhat different form from that 
first proposed. It is one of the numerous proofs 
that the professions of standing wholly aloof 
from politics, so persistently and ostentatiously 
paraded by the leaders of the schismatic party, 
are utterly unfounded; that in their efforts to 
promote a revolt from the General Assembly, 
they are forced to adopt a Church theory, al¬ 
most identical with ihe exploded doctrine of 
“State rights,” broached by those who sought 
to produce a division of the nation. Why, Mr. 
Editor, when we read that the General Assem¬ 
bly is a body of limited powers—that the pow¬ 
ers which it possesses it derives by delegation 
from the Presbyteries—that these are the sources 
of all Church power, &c , &c. We seem to have 
stepped by mistake into an old nullification 
caucus, only the words “Federal Government," 
and “Sovereign States" being displaced by 
other terms. These brethren may think them¬ 
selves entirely removed from the sphere of 
politics. But when lookers on see how in¬ 
stinctively the secessionists of the State become 
schismatics in the Church; and how inevitably 
they resort to the same theory of Church pow¬ 
er, that in its application to politics, was the 
cause of the late rebellion in the nation, they 
can not but smile at the self delusion, or scorn 
the insincerity of such pretences. 

There is, running through all the arguments 
on the other side, a great deal of loose talk or 
“twaddle," as Mr. Robinson s “ Gritic " calls it, 
about the Assembly’s being “a delegated body." 
So, to some extent, in every Church court above 
the Church session, and even in it “ruling 
elders are properly the representatives of the 
people.” Porm of Goy. p. TOO. I^ot all the 



72 


ruling elders, but only a delegated number, 
within the bounds of a Presbytery or Synod, 
are entitled to seats in the courts. To what 
end. then, the reiteration of the phrase “ def¬ 
eated body” as applied to the Assembly ? Is 
it to convey, by indirection, to those who have 
no t thought on these subjects, the idea that 
the lower courts are the sources of power in the 
Church; and that the powers of the Assembly 
are delegated to it by the Presbyteries? A 
great deal of what the renouncers of the As¬ 
sembly write, looks as if this were the object. 
Dr. Wilson says expressly: “ The only Assembly 
th at is essential to a Presbyterian Church is the 
Church Session. This is the fountain from which 
all the other Assemblies derive their power f A 
more complete renunciation of the Presbyteri- 
a n system of Church government, in fay or of 
indedependency; or a more thoroughly false 
and heretical view of the source of the powers 
of Church courts, could scarcely be expressed 
in the same number of words. 

I. The Assembly does not derive its powers from 
any inferior court. The idea is an absurdity in 
itself. The Lord Jesus Christ, as the only 
King and Head of his Church, is the source of 
all Church power. This power is not entrusted 
to a single Church court to be, by the members 
thereof delegated to other courts; but each 
court alike, from the session to the General 
Assembly, derives its powers for itself, im¬ 
mediately, from Christ. Dr. Stuart Robinson, 
in other days, had a glimpse of this funda¬ 
mental truth, when he tells us: “The same 
power is in every tribunal that is in any tribunal, 
whilst the power of the greater part is over the 
smaller part .” (Church of God, p. 92.) A much 
higher authority has expressed the true idea 
in these terms. “The jurisdiction and power 
of the supreme tribunal over all, are of the 
same nature, and have the same divine warrant as 
the jurisdiction and the power of the tribunals 
below it over the parts which they respective¬ 
ly rule.” The powers of the Assembly, then, 
are in no other sense delegated, in no other 
sense derived powers, than those of Presbyte¬ 
ries and other Church courts. All of them, 
when met in his name, have, directly from the 
Master himself, all power to rule the part of 
his Church entrusted to their care. 

II. I'he Assembly does not derive its powers from 
the Constitution of the Church. Here again is 
much looseness of thought and language in the 
discussions of brethren. I shall not attempt 10 
elaborate this point, after the masterly treat¬ 
ment of it by Dr. Hodge; already, 1 think, 
published in the Western Presbyterian. If the 
plain distinction which he makes between a 
constitution as a grant of power, and a Con¬ 
stitution as a treaty or agreement as to how 
the several courts shall exercise the powers 
which they derive from Christ, were kept con¬ 
stantly in view, it would relieve the discussion 
of these subjects of much confusion. With re¬ 
ference to any act of any Church court, the 
question is not, has this court the right to per¬ 
form this act, by the express terms of the Con¬ 


stitution, or a necessary inference from them? 
But does the Constitution forbid the exercise of 
this power ? If not, then it has the right for 
“Every Church court has within its limits, all 
Church powers .” (Dr. Hodge.) 

III. The General Assembly has, in certain cases, 
original jurisdiction. This follows necessarily 
from the theory of Church power. If “the same 
poweris in every tribunal that is in any tribu¬ 
nal, while the power of the greater is over the 
power of the smaller part,” as Dr. Stuart Robin¬ 
son once held and taught; the power of original 
jurisdiction in the Assembly necessarily results, 
else, there would be a power in the Presbytery 
not possessed by the General Assembly, which 
directly contradicts the doctrine. It may be 
replied, that although this be true, in theory , 
yet, in fact, such power does not belong to the 
General Assembly, because by the Constitution, 
it is forbidden to exercise it. To the extent 
that such power was claimed and exercised by 
the late Assembly, it is denied that there is any 
such Constitutional prohibition. And just 
here, issue is joined. Now what says the Con¬ 
stitution? 1st, there is much in the language 
used, which implies the existence of such pow¬ 
er in the Assembly. Let me quote: 

“ The General Assembly is the highest judi¬ 
catory of the Presbyterian Church. It shall 
represent, in one body, all the particular Church¬ 
es of this denomination.” (p.425.) Not Synods, 
nor Presbyteries, but Churches , observe. Again, 
“they” (the Assembly) “shall constitute the 
bond of union, peace, correspondence, and 
mutual confidence among all our Churches.” 
(p. 426—the same phraseology as before.) Not 
to Synods simply, cr Presbyteries —not to the 
whole body, regarded as bound together by 
these lower courts; the Assembly being the 
bond of the courts themselves, but to “all the 
Churches ” the Assembly is to constitute the 
bond of union. Further, “to the General As¬ 
sembly also belongs” (in addition mark you to 
their power of issuing appeals, reviewing re¬ 
cords, giving advice, &c., set forth in the pre¬ 
ceding section,) also belongs the power of 
deciding in all controversies respecting doc¬ 
trine and discipline; of reproving, warning, 
or bearing testimony against eiror in doctrine 
or immorality in practice in any Church, Pres¬ 
bytery or Synod, * * of suppressing 

schismatical contentions and disputaticus; and, 
in general, of recommending and attempting 
reformation of manners, and the promotion of 
charity, truth and holiness through all the 
Churches under their care.” (pp. 426-7.) The 
powers enumerated in this section, observe, are 
distinct and separate powers from those of hear¬ 
ing appeals, and reviewing records. These 
latter are enumerated in a different section. 
How then, I ask, (and I would be glad the 
astute lawyers who drew up the report to the 
Ebenezer Presbytery would reconsider their 
very ingenious piece of special pleading in 
view of the question (how can the Assembly 
exercise these powers, not by way of hearing 
appeals and references; not in the exercise of 


73 


the power of review and control, but in some 
different way, without exercising the power of 
original jurisdiction, which by the theory of 
Church power belongs to it? So far then from 
the Constitution taking from the Assembly the 
power of original jursidiction; by all just laws 
of interpretation, the exercise of such jurisdic¬ 
tion by the Assembly is clearly implied—be¬ 
cause, otherwise, the powers specifically enu- 
mei^ted and clearly distinguishable from the 
power of issuing appeals and references, and 
the power of review and control could not be 
exercised at all. 

2nd. There is nothing in the language of 
the Constitution necessarily inconsistent 
with the existence in the Assembly of the 
power of original jurisdiction. Oh! “say 
all these brethren,” you surely overlook the 
provision of the Book of Discipline, p. 464— 
“ process against a gospel minister shall al¬ 
ways be entered before the Presbytery of which 
he is a member.” No, I do not overlook it, but 
in the interpretation given to if, l do not allow 
myself to contradict the theory of Church pow¬ 
ers already referred to, and so pithily and 
quaintly expres-ed in the Second Book of Dis¬ 
cipline, chap. vii., sec. 31. “And generallie 
thir Assemblies have the haill power of the 
particular elderships (i e presbyteries) whair- 
of they are collectit.” Neither by the inter¬ 
pretation do I allow this particular clause to 
eviserate of all meaning the provisions of chap, 
xii., sec. 5, already quoted. We must inter¬ 
pret the various clauses of the Constitution so 
as to make them consistent with each other, 
and with truths elsewhere taught. Thisplaiu 
principle, these brethren all overlook. 

Well, what, then is the meaning of the pro¬ 
vision that “process against a gospel minister 
shall always be entered before the Presbytery 
of which he is a member?” Simply this: 1st. 
A minister must be tried by his peers. A 
Church Session, therefore, shall not assume 
jurisdiction over a minister, lie is amenable 
to his Presbytery. And, 2nd, No distant Pres- 
hyiery can put a minister on trial before them, 
though the offence may have been committed 
within their bounds. His co-Presbyters are 
to be his judges. It is not then the right of 
the Assembly >o exercise jurisdiction in those 
cases distinct from appeals and references, and 
distinct from review and control which have 
been before referred to, that is here denied ; 
but the right of any court lower than the Pres¬ 
bytery, or any distant Presbytery, to assume 
jurisdiction over a minister. That this is the 
true meaning of the clause is evident. 1st. 
From the original form of the provision as it 
stands in “The form of Process in the judica 
tures of the Church of Scotland, in Stuart of 
Pardovan’s “Collections,” chap. 7. “All pro¬ 
cesses against any minister are to begin be¬ 
fore the Presbytery to which he belongeth, 
and not before the kirk session of hit own parish.” 
And 2nd, from the connection in which it stands 
iu our Book itself. It ie said in the same sec¬ 
tion, p. 466; “and the same candor, caution, 


&c., substituting only the Presbytery for the 
Session,” &c. And in the immediate^ suc¬ 
ceeding section, rules are laid down to regular e 
‘proceedings in case of the “facts with which 
a minister stands charged, happening without 
the bounds of his own 1‘resbyteryf Still, even 
in that case, “process is always to be entered 
befo'-e the Presbytery of which he is a mem¬ 
ber.” I am sure that any candid mind, look¬ 
ing at this clause in its immediate connection, 
an in its relation to other provisions of cur 
Book, will arrive at the conclusion that there is 
nothing in it, fairly interpreted, which pro¬ 
hibits to the Assembly the power of original 
jurisdiction. 3rd. The practice of the Church 
of Scotland, as well as that of our own Church, 
shows that the power of original jurisdiction 
has always belonged to the General Assembly. 

But I have already trespassed too far, and 
must reserve what belongs to this head for an¬ 
other article. t 


The General Assembly and the Presbyteries . 

Mr. Editor: There are two assprtions con¬ 
tinually repeated by our brethren who have 
seceded from the General Assembly, which, if 
I read aright, are directly in the teeth of all 
documentary evidence in the case. 

1st. That Presbyteries are prior to the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly in point of time, and when 
they became numerous, organized the Assem¬ 
bly, so that the Assembly is the creature of the 
Presbyteries. 

2nd. That the Presbyteries are the sources 
of power, and that the Assembly being a dele¬ 
gated body, can exercise no powers except 
such as have been explicitly conferred upon it 
by the Presbyteries or incidental powers, es¬ 
sential to the proper exercise of those explicit¬ 
ly granted. As to the first point we must not 
be misled by the ambiguity of words. The 
word “Presbytery” is ambiguous. Strictly, it 
means a body of elders. In this, its original 
signification, it is applicable to every Church 
court composed of ruling and teaching elders. 
The Session is a congregational Presbytery ; 
the Synod is a provincial Presbytery; the 
General Assembly is a national Presbytery ; a 
general council, if composed of ministers and 
ruling elders, might, with perfect propriety, 
be called au ecumenical Presbytery. But. 
while the term Presbytery is thus applicable 
to every Church court, in ordinary discourse, 
it is used to describe the court no . t above the 
Session, called the Classis by ;3i Reformed 
Churches of the continent. 

The term “Assembly,” we may remark, is 
likewise ambiguous, and may in like manner 
be applied to every Church court from the low¬ 
est to tlie highest. If proof of this were want¬ 
ing, we might refer to 2d Book of Discipline, 
Chap. 7, Sec. 2:—“Assemblies a;e of four 
soriis &c.; and to Form of Government, chap, 
b, sec. 1, where express mention is made of 
“Congregational, Presbyterial, and Synodical 
Assemblies.” Commonly, however, the term 



74 


Assembly is applied to the highest Church 
Court. 

The question raised by our seceding breth¬ 
ren is one, not of words, but of fact. It is not 
whether a body called a Presbytery existed in 
our country prior to a body called an Assembly, 
which point no one cares to controvert, be¬ 
cause when decided, we are no nearer a con¬ 
clusion than before, all the courts, botn high 
and low, being equally Presbyteries and As¬ 
semblies. But the question is whether the 
original Presbytery corresponded, in idea and 
functions, to a classical Assembly, or to a na¬ 
tional Assembly ; whether that original Pres¬ 
bytery was a subordinate court, which, by some 
strange and happy endowment, possessed the 
power of creating bodies superior to itself; or 
whether it was in fact the supreme judicatory 
of our infant Church, which, by powers in¬ 
herent in it as such, created a Synod, com¬ 
posed of three or more Presbyteries ; the said 
Synod also being in time subdivided, and pro¬ 
visions being made for subordinate Synods, 
and the organization of the General Assem¬ 
bly. 

Now, on this plain question of fact, we ask 
attention to a few authorities. The first is 
from Baird’s Digest, p. 276. “The General 
Assembly is not a body created by voluntary 
union of Presbyteries and Synods, as is some¬ 
times assumed ; but itself the original body, 
whence they have derived their existence and 
powers. The first General Assembly of the 
Church of Scotland consisted of six ministers 
and thirty-four other persons, spontaneously 
met, and constituting at once the highest ju¬ 
dicatory ot the Church, and the only one 
above the Parochial Presbytery. Precisely 
analagous was the origin of our General As¬ 
sembly.” 

This author goes on to state that the first 
leaf of the original minutes being lost, we can¬ 
not be sure of the precise date of the organi¬ 
zation, or the particular persons who com¬ 
posed the first meeting. The date, as lie 
shows, was probably 1704, and he gives, the 
names of the ministers who sornposed the body 
in 1706. Respecting the name and powers of 
this body, 1 again quote: “It ordinarily as¬ 
sumed the title of 1 the Presbytery ,’ never that 
of the ‘Presbytery of Philadelphia.’ It as¬ 
serted to itself, and was rccoguized as pos¬ 
sessing, not merely the functions of a particu¬ 
lar subordinate Presbytery, * * * but the 
powers of a supreme judicatory. * * * Its ap¬ 

propriate title is '•The General Presbytery.' 

The second authority is that of the minutes 
of this original Presbytery, as found on pp. 
45-6, of the “Records of the Presbyterian 
Church.” The date is 1716, Die Veneris, at 
three o clock, afternoon. “It having pleased 
Divine Providence so to increase our number, 
as that, * * we judge it may be more service¬ 
able to the interest of religion to divide our¬ 
selves into subordinate meetings or Presbyteries, 
constituting one annually as a Synod, * * 

therefore, &c , &c ” 


The Synod thus constituted, consisted of 
three Presbyteries, with arrangements for a 
fourth, and is in terms recogLized as the same 
body as the original Presbytery. In 1 ? 41 a 
schism occurred in this Synod, two Synods be¬ 
ing formed; but in 1758 these Synods were 
re-united, and formed the supreme judicatory 
of the Church until 1789. I quote from the 
minutes of the Synod of New York and Phil¬ 
adelphia, of date, May 19, 1786, Records, p. 
517. “The following motion was made and 
seconded, viz: The Synod, considering the 
number and extent of the Churches under 
their care, and the inconvenience of the pres¬ 
ent mode of government by one Synod, re¬ 
solved, that this Synod will establish out of its 
own body, three or more subordinate Synods, out 
of which shall be composed a General Assembly ,” 
&c., &c. A committee was appointed to pre¬ 
pare a plan. On the 29tli of May, 1788, that 
plan was adopted by the following resolution 
—Records, pp. 547-8. 

“Resolved, unanimously, That this Synod 
be divided, and it is hereby divided into four 
Synods * * * and that this division 

shall commence on the dissolution of the pres¬ 
ent Synod. 

“Resolved , That the first meeting of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly, to be constituted out of the 
above said four Synods, be held, and it is 
hereby appointed to be held on the third 
Thursday of May, 1789, in the Second Presby¬ 
terian Church, in the city of Philadelphia, at 
11 o’clock A. M.,” &c., &c. 

So far is it from the truth, therefore, that the 
Assembly was organized by the Presbyteries; 
that is, the highest judicatory by the lowest, 
directly the reverse is true. The supreme ju¬ 
dicatory of the Church‘did, in 1716, divide it¬ 
self into a number of Presbyteries, which, 
when met in annual session, was to b • styled 
a Synod ; and again, in 1788, the Synod, then 
the highest court, divided itself into four sub¬ 
ordinate Synods, and resolved that out of the 
said subordinate Synods, there should be con¬ 
stituted the General Assembly. The last au¬ 
thority with which I must conclude, and defer 
what I have to say upon the second point, is 
from the u Presbyterial Critic ,” for August, 
1855. I quote from pp. 849-50: Notwith¬ 
standing all the twaddle about the limited, 
delegated, and defined power of the General 
Assembly—the Presbyteries being the source 
of all its powers, &c., &c., these following 
facts are thoroughly fundamental and undeni¬ 
able : 

“1st. Historically , the Generaly Assembly, 
and not the Presbyteries is the successor of 
the original Church Session, planted on this 
continent by Mr. Kemie (McRemie?)—and of 
the first Presbytery ever set up on these shores 
of our order; and is, therefore, the true suc¬ 
cessor and real depository of all the powers 
vested by God in that original Church, our 
Presbytery. 

2. Theoretically , the General Assembly is 
ihe general gathering of 1L the Presbyterian 


75 


congregations—connected with us—all form¬ 
ing one Church; and as such, has all the in¬ 
herent power over the whole body that any 
part has over itself. 

3. Divinely, the General Assembly, ordained 
of God, is but the universal Presbytery of the 
Church, and God’s Bible is the source of its 
powers. The Church Constitution did not 
make it; but it, when it was in the form of the 
mere Synod, made that Constitution according 
to the word of God,” &c., &c. 

The reader will perceive that this authority 
speaks to both of the questions raised by the 
seceding brethren. It shows that the Assem¬ 
bly is before the Presbyteries not created by 
them. It shows that the Assembly derives its 
powers, not from the Presbyteries by delega¬ 
tion, or from the Constitution; but, jure divino , 
from the word of God. 

It will doubtless give additional weight to 
the authority just cited, to remind the reader, 
that of the Presbyterial Critic, Rev. Stuart 
Robinson was the chief editor—that in order 
to avoid responsibility for articles published 
in the Critic, the sentiments cf which lie did 
not approve, he announced p. 238, “We adopt 
the plan of distinguishing as ‘for the Critic,’ 
all such articles as contain * opinions which 
the conductors do not substantially agree 
with.” The article from which I have quoted 
is the leadiug one of the number, and does not 
bear the mark “for the Critic.” We are there¬ 
fore left to infer that Rev. Stuart Robinson, in 
1855 substantially agreed with the writer in 
holding that the talk of the limited, delegated, 
and defined powers of the General Assembly, 
the Presbyteries being the source of all its 
powers, was twaddle —that it is a thoroughly 
fundamental and undeniable fact, that the 
General Assembly is the real depository of all 
the powers vested by God in our Presbyterian 
Churdi—that the Assembly has all the inhe¬ 
rent power over the whole body that any part 
has over itself; and that the General Assem¬ 
bly is ordained of God, and God’s Bible the 
source whence it derives its powers. Such he 
held as true substantially, in 1855. But in 
1806, alas ! quantum mulatus ab illo. 


Alledyed Unconstitutionality—New School Doc¬ 
trine. 

The Lexington Address, a collaborator with 
the Free Christian Commonwealth, joins in the 
hue-and-cry against the action of the last As¬ 
sembly as unconstitutional, terribly unconstitu¬ 
tional. It repeats the charge ad nausuem , and 
that is about all it does. As for proof, that is 
a matter outside of the province of this great 
paper. It asserts, and then begs you to neglect. 
It rises for above the low plane of the logical 
understanding, and it makes its home in the 
pure regions of intuition. The unconstitu¬ 
tionality of the act of Assembly is as clear to 
its imperial gaze as the sun at high noon. The 
slovenly plodders, however, who grope their 
way amid the mists and fogs of the lower at¬ 


mosphere, would have been thankful for even 
one grain of sound argument. But it” is not 
our purpose now to discuss directly the con¬ 
stitutional question ; that, lms been done al¬ 
ready, and done effectually in behalf of the 
contested deliverance, in the columns of the 
Western Presbyterian as well as in the pages 
of the Princeton Review. We wish just now 
to direct attention to a few items in the vast 
body of evidence that the opponents of the 
Assembly of 1806 occupy the ground of the 
New School men of ’37. 

The General Assembly is the Church of 
Jesus Christ convened in the persons of i13 
representative ofiice-bearers. We can hear the 
Church only as we can hear it speaking 
through its divinely appointed representatives. 
“It [the General Assembly] is the tribunal of 
the whole Church; it is the whole Church met 
in one Assembly of its office-bearers, exactly 
as a Church session is a particular Church met 
by its office-bearers; and the jurisdiction and 
power of the supreme tribunal over all, are of 
the same nature, and have the same divine 
warrant as the jurisdiction and the power of 
the tribunals below it over the parts which 
they respectively rule.” [Breckinridge s The¬ 
ology.) This is the doctrine taught in the 
Danville Theological Seminary before it had 
apostatized, forsooth, from the principles it was 
founded to uphold and propagate. Who is the 
real apostate from these principles, let the 
teachings of the Free Christian Commonwealth 
attest. Whatever powers, then, Christ has 
granted to his Church, belong to the General 
Assembly; and there is no restriction upon 
the exercise of these powers further than is 
expressly imposed by the Constitution. These 
powers are derived from Christ, and set forth 
in His word. lie is the fountain of power— 
not the Presbyteries. Whatever the Church 
may lawfully do, the Assembly may do. The 
limitations, whatever they be, put upon the 
exercise of its powers, are of the nature of 
economical arrangements for the orderly and 
convenient administration of government. 
Why not a Synod or the Assembly examine 
and ordain a man? There is no reason in the 
nature of the thing to be done, why these tri¬ 
bunals may not do it; but for the sake of con¬ 
venience this work is assigned to the Presby¬ 
teries. And it would be very difficult to show 
that, even under cur Constitution, the higher 
tribunals may not. exercise this power of ordi¬ 
nation, or any other, should they see cause to 
do so. The Federal Government has no power 
not specified in the Constitution; the supreme 
tribunal of the Church has all the power 
Christ has granted to the Church, and that 
Church may not tie its own hands. Emer¬ 
gencies may arise for the exercise of all its 
inherent powers. The language of our Con¬ 
stitution, accordingly, is very peculiar. It 
does not, interdict the exercise of auy Scrip¬ 
tural power on the part of that Great Council 
which is neither more nor less than the whole 
Church itself. It says the General Assembly 



76 


shall do so and bo ; to the General Assembly 
belongs the power of doing so and so; but it 
nowhere eays the General Assembly shall not 
do thus and so. And this well guarded 
phraseology of the Constitution is not devoid 
of significance; for the Church may not de¬ 
nude itself of its rights or its responsibilities. 
This whole question of Church power, the 
nature of it, the limitations of it, the powers 
of the General Assembly—all was discussed 
over and over again in the great controversy 
that re ulted in the disruption of 1838; and 
we unhesitatingly affirm that the Declaration 
and Testimony men of to day, their abettors 
and apologists, and other opponents of the ac¬ 
tion of the last Assembly, are in substantial 
agreement in fundamental principles with the 
New School party of to-day. No wonder the 
Southern Presbyterian, sounds the note of 
alarm to its '‘brethren in the border States,” 
and warns them of their danger of landing 
“in downright Independency or Congregation¬ 
alism, the very fountain-head of all the evil 
that is afflicting the Church of God.” The 
Second Book of Discipline will not save them. 
They are fast gravitating down the ecclesias¬ 
tical scale. Dr. Wilson lias already left the 
Presbytery out in the cold, and finds his beau 
ideal of jure divino Presbyterianism in the 
Church session. One step more and he gets 
to the brotherhood. Dr. Robinson still accords 
to the General Assembly a kind of half-way 
jure divino existence. No, no; the Second Book 
of Disc ptine does not sustain their theory of 
the powers of the Assembly, its sphere and 
functions, and its relations to the lower courts. 
Even the extracts given in the Commonwealth 
of August 30, do not make good the positions 
they have assumed; much less the parts 
omitted D*. R. says this venerable symbol 
of the Scotch Church teaches that the higher 
courts “neither ordain or depose office-bear¬ 
ers;” yet section 30 of the chapter from which 
he quotes, lying too in the very midst of sec¬ 
tions lie does quote, and which he has strange¬ 
ly overlooked, says of the provincial Assem¬ 
bly or Synod, totidem verbis. “It iias powkr 
to depose the office-bearers of that province 
for gude and just causes deserving depriva¬ 
tion.” Several of the other points he makes 
in summing up the case, have just the same 
amount of support as the one here noticed. 
Let “every candid man” read the seventh 
clnpter of the “Book,” and then judge for 
himself. One of Dr. Robinson’s latest crot¬ 
chets, and which likewise he endeavors to 
father on the Second Book of Discipline, is 
that the Synod or Geueral Assembly is neces¬ 
sary only to the perfection of our system in 
developing the unity of the Church. Is that 
the kind of necessity taught in the Doctor’s 
book on the Church of God, touching any of 
the tribunals of the Church ? Is that the doc¬ 
trine taught at Danville? Let the reader 
tun to the work just named, Part 111, sec. 10, 
pp. 02-3, and ponder these words in connec¬ 
tion with what immediately precedes: “So, 


tribunals, in a coiresponding extent of juris¬ 
diction, must of necessity exist in order to the 
discharge of the functions which we have 
seen are an absolute condition of the existence of 
the Church as one visible body.” Let him also 
note the statement about the middle of the 
section: “Hence, therefore, the same power is 
in every tribunal that is any tribunal.” It is 
utterly impossible to reconcile these utter¬ 
ances with those of the Free Christian Com¬ 
monwealth. 

“Hei mihi, qualis erat! quantum mutatus ab 
illo 

IIec<ore, qui redit exuvias indutus Acliillei, 
Vel Danaurn Phrygios jaculatus puppibus 
ignes! 

Squalentem barbam, et concretes sanguine 
crines 

Vulneraque ilia gerens,” etc. 

If the Doctor has not fallen from grace, he 
has certainly fallen from the simple rigid 
principles of Presbyterianism he once held 
and taught. We beg leave, in explanation of 
these principles to supplement IPs long list of 
quotations from the Scotch symbol by adding 
one quite as pertinent to these times as any he 
has produced; “12. They, [the four sorts of 
Assemblies specified,] have power to execute 
ecclesiastical discipline and | unishment upon 
all transgressors and proud contemners of the 
gude order and policie of the kirk, and swa 
the hail 1 discipline is in thair hands. Has 
not the General Assembly, then, the authority 
of Melville and his compeers for executing 
discipline and punishment upon the Declara¬ 
tion and Testimony men? 

In the printed report of Messrs. Spilman 
and Marshall, Commissioners from Ebenezer 
Presbytery, the point urged is the denial of 
original jurisdiction to the Assembly. This is 
elaborated with great assiduity, and consti¬ 
tutes the burden of their argument against 
the constitutionality of the recent act. With 
exceeding propriety they appeal to the pro¬ 
ceedings of the New School Assembly of 18*36. 
They find in a deliverance of that body a 
statement of the powers of the Assembly 
which they heartily approve. They might 
also have summoned to their aid “a manifesto” 
issued by the leading New School men of Ken¬ 
tucky, in opposition to the measures of 1837 
and ’38, and oilier documents almost innumer¬ 
able from the same quarter. To i he s.n vors 
of that great struggle, on both sides, it must 
be not a little amusing to find these brethren 
of the Old School to day drawing fm > such 
an armory weapons wherewith to fight ilieir 
own Assembly of 1866. The old heroes who, 
in their youth, fought the fight about e na¬ 
ture of the Presbyterianism of this country, 
must look with wonder at this turn in the 
present controversy. We ask our readers to 
examine the report of Messrs. Spilman and 
Marshall, (to be found iu the Western Presby¬ 
terian, of August 16,) and then turn, if iliey 
have it in their possession, to the article on 


77 


the General Assembly in the July number of 
the Princeton Review, for 1837, pp. 40", 485 
—particularly the notice of the discussion on 
the resolutions offered by Mr. (now Dr.) 
Plumer, on the “citation of judicatories ” 
Whoever will study these several papers, must 
be convinced that these respected brethren 
have gone over to the New School. Their ec¬ 
clesiastical principles are those of the men 
who resisted and denounced our fathers of the 
last generation. 

The resolutions offered by Dr. Plumer were 
opposed by Messrs. Jest up, White, Bcman, 
Dickinson, Peters and McAul°y, and advo¬ 
cated by Messrs. Plumer, Breckinridge, and 
Baxter. Our brethren of the opposition to¬ 
day stand shoulder to shoulder with Drs. Be- 
man and Peters against the views advocated 
by Drs. Plumer, Breckinridge and Baxter in 
that critical era of the Church’s history. And 
yet Dr. Stuart Robinson and his coadjutors 
would fain make the impression that they are 
the staunch conservators of the ecclesiastical 
principles of 1837. Now, what were the main 
points made by Drs. Beman and Peters, and 
their friends against the resolutions of Dr. 
Plumer? Let them be distinctly noted. (1.) 
“It was denied that the Assembly possessed 
original jurisdiction such as it is now pro¬ 
posed to exercise”—i. e., in the matter of dis¬ 
cipline. This is the precise doctrine also of 
the New School deliverance of 1856, which 
Messrs. Spilman and Marshall laud as a paper 
of “singular ability,” and an “exceedingly 
clear and accurate analysis of the whole sub¬ 
ject.” Mark the language they quote and 
adopt : “The disciplinary function of the As¬ 
sembly is simply appellate and revisionary.” 
(2.) “The session is under the review and con¬ 
trol of the Presbytery; the Presbytery of the 
Synod, and the Synod of the General Assem¬ 
bly ; because they alone have the legal right 
to inspect their records. The General Assem¬ 
bly is, therefore, constitutionally restricted to 
action on the Synods. Unless you can show 
by some ecclesiastical multiplication table, 
that the General Assembly is next above a 
Presbytery, or Session, or individual member, 
you have no right to issue a citation to them, 
and it would be an act of usurpation in you 
to do it.” So said the New Sehool leaders in 
1837; so say Messrs. Spilman and Marshall 
now : “To permit it [the General Assembly] 
to stretch out its great arm over the Synod to 
the Presbytery, and over both these to the 
Session; to substitute its own process for that 
of the inferior courts; * * * we cannot 

but regard this as a most alarming stretch ef 
prerogative, which if practically carried out 
to its legitimate results, would convert the 
Assembly into an overshadowing ecclesiasti¬ 
cal despotism.” 

In the eleventh section of their report, the 
Commissioners from Ebenezer Presbytery ex¬ 
press unbounded surprise at the interpretation 
put by the defenders of the Assembly on Art. 
V., Chap. XIL of the Form of Government; 


and in the same section give certain views of 
their own respecting form of process. Con¬ 
tending with the New School leaders in 1837 
about the just interpretation of this very 
article of the Constitution, the eminent and 
revered Dr. Baxter, of Virginia, said, “Here 
is a most important power entrusted to the 
General Assembly; but it is said it amounts 
to nothing, because there is no form of pro¬ 
cess distinctly marked out. This is a mis¬ 
take. In the full power here granted is in¬ 
cluded that of originating new and necessary 
forms of process which may be suited to the 
exigency of the case.” On reading these 
woids of the venerable Virginian, one feels 
as if the great dead had risen from the grave 
to rebuke the men of this generation. Surely 
history repeats itself. 

We leave our readers to judge if this show¬ 
ing is not sufficient to prove our case. Right 
or wrong, the opponents of the Assembly of 
1866 have gone over to the New School. They 
have joined the camp of our old adversaries of 
1837. A True Presbyterian. 


The Two Testimonies. 

The one of 1835 and tl;e one of 1865—A 
Parallel. 

A tree is judged by its fruits; the magni¬ 
tude of a work, by its results. If the Declara¬ 
tion and Testimony be Judged by either of 
these rules, it will be found wanting. As to 
its results , we propose to [run a parallel be¬ 
tween it and the famous Act and Testimony, 
on tne basis of which the orthodox faith was 
vindicated in the great controversy between 
the Old and new School. The Declaration and 
Testimony was “adopted by the Presbytery 
of Louisville, at Bardstown, Sept. 2nd, A. D, 
1865.” It was published to the world a few 
weeks afterwards. It called for a convention 
of all who sympathized in its views and pur¬ 
poses, to be held at blank on the blank day of 
blank ) sometime during the cureut year: which 
convention —like some western towns—never 
had any existance, except in somebody’s im- 
magination, or at most on paper. It also call¬ 
ed on “Those Ministers and Buling Elders who 
concur in this Testimony” to send in their 
names as signers: and on all Presbyteries and 
Synods who adopted it to send up a copy of 
their “adher.ng act.” One whole year has 
since elapsed. The whole matter has been 
pretty thoroughly discussed. But not a single 
Presbytery or Synod has since adopted it. The 
Synod of Kentucky, out of the busom of which, 
it was given to the world, formally condemned 
it in emphatic terms. Even the Synod of Mis¬ 
souri, after carefully considering it, declined 
to adopt it; although a decided majority of 
that body, are supposed to sympathize with the 
views and feelings of its signers. 

We have before us the second (pamphlet) 
edition of this document. It has the names of 
forty-one ministers and leventy-eight Ruling 



Elders attached to it. We believe the names 
of perhaps a dozen others have since been ad¬ 
ded. Since its first issue, not a single promi¬ 
nent minister or elder in the Church has sub¬ 
scribed it. On the contrary, most of them, 
even among its apologists, have condemned it. 
Even Dr. Boardman, in the paper offered to the 
Assembly, as a substitute for the Gurley paper, 
felt constrainedgto condemn it as schismatical. 
(If schismatical , of course, to that extent sinful.) 
At the end of the year, there it stands before 
the world with nearly one hundred and fifty 
name out of ten thousand or more ofiice bearers 
to whom it appeals for their approval. 

The fact that this paper adopts, in part the 
very language of the Act and Testimony of 
1835; and that its advocates often refer to that 
celebrated paper, justifies us in running a par¬ 
allel bet ween them. On the 30th of May, 1834, 
while the General Assembly was in session at 
Philadelphia, the Act and Testimony was gi¬ 
ven to the world; signed by thirty-seven min¬ 
isters and twenty-seven elders: sixty-four in 
all. At the meeting of the next Assembly— 
one year afterwards—it. had been “either en¬ 
tirely or substantially” adopted by five Synods 
and thirty Presbyteries; and had been signed 
by three hundred and seventy-four ministers 
and one thousand seven hundred and eigh'y- 
nine elders ! 

In August, I860, a convention of the sign¬ 
ers of the Declaration and Testimony and their 
sympathizers met according to a call made in 
May previous, in St. Louis, Mo. There were 
present about seventy Ministers and Elders— 
mostly from Misouri; representing, perhaps, 
three or four Presbyteries, and minorities in 
some dozen or less other Presbyteries :—all 
outside of Kentucky and Misouri, we believe, 
confessedly represented no Presbytery. From 
the published correspondence, the tidings of 
the Churches seems to have brought them lit¬ 
tle sympathy and no encouragement. Now 
the contrast. 

On the 16th of May, 1835, a convention of 
the Act and Testimony men met in Philadel¬ 
phia, “The members represented forty-one 
Presbyteries and thirteen minorities of Pres¬ 
byteries ! 

The conclusion is irresistable. The voice of 
God’s people responded largely to the Act and 
Testimony of 1835, in terms of approval. That 
voice has responded, with equal clearness, to 
the Declaration and Testimony of 1865, in 
terms of condemnation. And upon this con¬ 
clusion we desire to make an appeal, specially 
to those who do not approve the Declaration 
and Testimony yet propose to take such a 
course as will lead to the same result—the di¬ 
vision of the churches in Kentucky and Mis 
souri. The voice of the Church, with an over¬ 
whelming unanimity, condemns the Declara¬ 
tion and Testimony. You declare your pur¬ 
pose, many of ycu, to adhere to the Church. 
Is it not then your duty to avoid such a course as 
will , inevitably , result in the division of the 
Church. 


On the New School Trade. 

The “New Theory ” not so new after all. 

We have from time to time characterized the 
views put forth by Dr. Robinson and the other 
leaders of the Declaration and Testimony move¬ 
ment as a “new theory” of Presbyterianism. 
In this Ave have perhaps done them injustice. 
For it is not a “ new theory” after all, in the 
sense that it was never advanced before. They 
are not responsible for its authorship. On the 
other hand we have perhaps given them over¬ 
much credit. For they have not the poor merit 
of having invented, or discovered their system 
of church doctrine, weak and illogical as it is. 
From what follows, it will be seen how closely 
these modern reformers of the church are fol¬ 
lowing in the track of those who took the lead 
of the New School party, in the great contro¬ 
versy of 1837-8. 

We propose to state here some of the chief 
grounds of objection made to the acts of the 
Assembly of 1837; and compare them with 
the “Statement of Doctrines and Principles 
adopted by the Conference at St. Louis, in 
August last. 

The New School party held, 

(1.) u That the Assembly has no authority to 
judge of the qualifications oj its own members ."— 
This ground w T as taken, as against the action 
of the Assembly (1837) in excluding from seats 
the commissioners from certain Presbyteries. 
A leading advocate of this party maintained 
that “ the commission is the only sufficient 
evidence of the requisite qualifications of the 
delegate” to the Assembly. Dr. Hodge held 
that the Assembly had the right (1) to decide 
whether Presbyteries were qualified to send 
repre>entatives to the body at all; and (2) to 
decide whether ecnmvssioners, coming from 
Presbyteries in good standing, were entitled 
to seats; and in either case to exclude them 
from seats if the necessary qualifications were 
wanting. He says: “A cause must surely be 
desperate t hat requires such a right to be deni¬ 
ed to any representative body on earth.”— 
Prin. Rev. for July, 1838, pp 490-91. But this 
is precisely the “right” denied to the Assembly 
of 1866, which excluded the Louisville com¬ 
missioners, and the denial is cast into a doc¬ 
trinal statement by the St. Louis Conference 
in these words: “It (the General Assembly’-) 
is not the judge of the qualifications of its 
members.” Taat is to say, as was argued, in 
the debate, the Presbyteries are the sole judges 
of the qualifications of delegates to the Assem¬ 
bly. 

On this point, therefore, those who opposed 
the Assembly in 1837-8, and those who oppose 
the Assembly of 1866 hold identically the same 
doctrine. Again, it was held.by the New School 
men of ’37, 

(2.) That the Assembly has no right of original 
jurisdiction; that it is strictly and solely a court 
of appeal. One who was accepted as their 
advocate, said on this point: u The Church Ses¬ 
sion and Presbytery alone have original jurisdic- 


79 


(ion. The Synods and Assembly are merely 
courts of review—appellate courls. They have 
none of them legislative powers.” After quot¬ 
ing, or rather garbling, the Confession of Faith, 
he adds: “I am thus particular on this point, 
because the ‘usurped claims of making laws’ 
was actually set up, and these proceedings (of 
the Assembly of 1837) justified as legislative 
acts.” It will be seen that the venerable As¬ 
sembly of ’37, which all sound Old School men 
so much delight to honor, was charged with 
“usurping authority ” also; and on the same 
grounds with the Assembly of 1866! The plat¬ 
form of the St. Louis Conference says, Sec. 10, 
The General Assembly has no legislative powers, 
properly so called; and it has no original juris¬ 
diction whatever in cases of judicial process, but 
is strictly and solely a court of Appeal. Here 
again the agreement is perfect. Now if we 
turn to the debates in the Assembly of’37, we 
find these views.as developed in the arguments, 
of the New School leaders, according well with 
the arguments used by the Declaration men. 

On the 25th of May, 1837, resolutions were 
introduced by Rev. (now Dr ) Plumer, citing 
certain inferior judicatories to the bar of the 
next Assembly; and excluding them from seats 
in that body “until their case shall be decided.” 
The debate on these resolutions extended thro’ 
three sessions of the Assembly. On the New 
School side were ranged Jessup, White, Beman, 
Dickinson and Peters. On the part of the Old 
School, were Plumer, Breckinridge and Baxter. 
What a host! It was maintained by Drs. 
Beman, Peters, &c. 

(1.) That the Assembly had no “original 
jurisdiction.” 

(2.) That it had no right to pass by the Syn¬ 
od to the Presbyteries: “to reach its strong arm 
over the intervening courts,” that all process 
must go by regular gradation, from one court 
to that next above. 

(8.) That a man going to the Assembly with 
a commission from a Presbytery, could not be 
excluded from a scat in the Assembly. 

(4.) That the Assembly is not a perpetual 
body. 

(5.) That the proposed measure was “ un¬ 
paralleled in the history of legislative or judi¬ 
cial proceedings!” 

The above statement is taken from the Prin¬ 
ceton Review for July, 1837. This was the 
staple of the argument against that great As¬ 
sembly. We need not stop to point out how 
perfectly it accords with the ground of opposi¬ 
tion to the Assembly of 1866. The attentive 
readers of the Free Christian Commonwealth 
must be as familiar with these arguments as 
with Webster’s spelling-book. But the re¬ 
sponse to these objections from the other side 
is very note-worthy. They maintained, from 
our Standards, that the Assembly had the right 
of “original jurisdiction;” that it has authority 
to pass by the intervening courts to those be¬ 
low; that it had the right to exclude commis¬ 
sioners to the Assembly from seats, &c. Such 
were the views of the leaders of the Old School 


party in 1837. They saved the Church then; 
they will not ruin it now. 

But what we note specially, is the identity of 
the doctrine of Church order held by the New 
School and Semi-Congregationalists then, with 
the platform put forth by the Declaration men 
and their apologists now. Drs. Beman and 
Peters, Drs. Wilson and Robinson stand shoul¬ 
der to shoulder, on the New School platform of 
1837! Nor do they stand alone. The Lexing¬ 
ton Address takes the same ground. It denies 
to the Assembly the right of original juris¬ 
diction;” the power to dissolve a Presbytery]; 
the right to deal an ith ministers except by ap¬ 
peal, &c.—See Address, page 6. So the com¬ 
missioners of Ebenezer Presbytery, in their 
report, published in the Western Presbyterian 
of August 16th. These brethren follow the 
New School track even more closely than the 
others. Sections one, two, three, five, eight, and 
nine of their report are but an exact transcript 
of the arguments urged by Drs. Beman, Peters 
and others against the action of the Assembly 
of 1837. Even their declamation is after the 
same pattern. Say the New School worthies: 
“this measure is unparalleled in the history of 
legislative or judicial proceedings! ” Say our 
Ebenezer brethren: “Since the world began was 
it not heard” i hat such a thing was done! Says 
the Lexington Address: “It is without precedent 
in ecclesiastical or civil legislation !” Says the 
Declaration and Testimony, page 21: “Thus the 
General Assembly has itself become the abet¬ 
tor of injustice and despotism.” Whatharmony 
betwixt the accusers of the Old School Assem¬ 
blies of 183? and 1866! Their doctrine of 
Church order the same; their logic identical; 
even their rhetoric is cast in the same mold. 
Their music is said to be set to the tune of 
Dixie: they certainly have a New School man 
for their chief musician. Yet these brethren 
accuse the Assembly, and those who adhere to 
it, of seeking a reunion with the New School! 
We are no prophet. But we hazard the as¬ 
sertion that they themselves—many of them— 
will, within a brief period, be in union with 
the New School—South; whose organ at Rich¬ 
mond now applauds their doctrine ot the 
Church. 


Precedem s. 

It is some time since the men of the Declar¬ 
ation and Testimony have appealed to Scot¬ 
tish history for precidents to sustain them in 
their schismatical course. Formerly they 
abounded in phrases culled from the “League 
and Covenant,” and in touching stories of 
martyrdom for Christ’s Headship and Crown. 
Why have they ceased to instruct us from the 
annals of the ancient Kirk? We fear that 
they have found out upon closer search that 
the “Lights and Shadows of Scottish Life” is 
not an exact copy of the “Acts of the Assem¬ 
bly,” and that the heroic covenanter, hiding 
among the glens, to escape from Claverhouse 
and his bloody dragoons, does not represent 



80 


the exact character of Scotch Presbyterian¬ 
ism. 

There is indeed good reason for silence, un¬ 
less they are rash enough to attempt a com¬ 
plete falsification of history. If their charges 
against our own Chui'ch are true and just, then 
We are prepared to prove by precisely the 
same arguments, that the Kirk of Scotland 
has for long centuries been “apostate” and 
“corrupt,” and that her bloody struggles for 
Christ’s Kingdom and Crown were all a delu¬ 
sion, Her illustrious martyrs and confessors 
knew not. whar they were contending for; and 
it has remained tor these days to bring forth 
the men who are to rectify the apostacy of 
ages, and build up a pure spiritual Church. 
For every act passed by our Assembly in 
bearing testimony against evil-doers and se¬ 
ditious men, we are prepared to show a par¬ 
allel, in the deliverances of the General Kirk 
of Scotland; and even more, for if we have 
chastised “with whips,’, they have done it 
“with scorpions.” As a simple illustration, 
take the recent order forbiddiug the “signers” 
to sit in Presbytery until their cases have been 
decided by the General Assembly—an order 
which those excluded tell us that the Assem¬ 
bly had no power to enact—and compare it 
with the following. It is entitled, “An Act 
concerning Admitting Expectants to their 
Trials and Ruling Elders to act in Presbyte¬ 
ries and Synods.” 

“The General Assembly, cons'dering the 
great prejudice like to arise to this Kirk by 
increasing our unhappy differences and dis¬ 
tractions, if young men shall be admitted into 
the ministry, which shall still blow the fire of 
contention, and continue in avowed opposi¬ 
tion to and contempt of the public judicato¬ 
ries, therefore ordains Presbyteries to take 
special care that, upon the calling of any ex¬ 
pectant to a particular charge of the ministry, 
before they admit him to his trials, they re¬ 
quire him under his hand to pass from the 
protestations and declinations against this and 
the preceding Assemblies, if he hath been ac¬ 
cess ny to the same, &c. Likewise the As¬ 
sembly considering the prejudice of elders 
coming to Presbyteries for strengthening a 
faction in opposition to the public judicatories, 
ordains that Presbyteries shall require the 
same thing pre-mentioned, of every ruling 
elder that comes to sit and act in Presbytery, 
and in case of his refusal, shall not admit 
him to act as an elder in the Presbytery, but 
require the Kirk Session from which he is 
sent, to make choice of, and send another who 
for the peace of this Church shall agree to 
perform the conditions required.” (See Acts 
of the Gen. As. Ch. of Scotland, p. 1,152 ) 

These “fathers of Presbyterianism” under¬ 
stood the power of the General Assembly, nor 
did they hesitate to use it for the proteciion of 
the Church against those who sought to dis¬ 
tract its communion. And yet the exercise of 
the same power by the Presbyterian Church 
in this country 13 deemed an additional evi¬ 


dence of “apostacy” and “cortupfci >n!” Such 
evidence can have weight only with the igno¬ 
rant, and those who are led by their preju¬ 
dices and not by their judgments. We would 
recommend those who are seeking so earnest¬ 
ly to divide the Church, to study the history 
of Presbyterianism in Scotland. 


Final action of the Assembly in regard to the 
Declaration 'party. 

As the publication of this pamphlet was 
delayed, from various causes until the meet¬ 
ing of the General Assembly at Cincinnati 
(May 1867) we have the opportunity of in¬ 
serting the deliverance made by that body, 
disposing of the whole controversy, with the 
“Declaration and Testimony” men, and their 
adherent. This conclusion was reached af¬ 
ter allowing the farest discussion by the 
representatives of that party, claiming seats ; 
the discussion occupying the entire time of 
the Assembly for about three days. The ut¬ 
most kindness and courtesy was shown to¬ 
wards these brethren throughout; and at the 
close of the debate, the following paper was 
adopted hv a vote of two hundred and fifty- 
eight to four ! This may be accepted as the 
final disposal of this unhappy controversy. 
It only remains to he seen whether those will 
now remain in the church, wdio have so often 
declared they “will not go out, unless driven 
out.” 

Report of the Committee on the “Declaration and 
Testimony .” 

Rev. Dr. Stanton, chairman of the Commit¬ 
tee on the Declaration and Testimony, read the 
report of that committee, which was the order 
of the day, as follows : 

“The committee to whom were referred sun¬ 
dry papers relating to the divisions of the Sy¬ 
nods of Kentucky and Missouri, and of the 
Presbyteries under there care, which has resul¬ 
ted in two sets of commissioners claiming 
seats in this General Assembly from several of 
these Presbyteries, and also sundry papers 
concerning the signers of the paper entitled 
‘A Declaration and Testimony,’ etc., together 
with the citation of said signers, who were 
summoned by the last General Assembly to 
appear before the present Assembly, beg leave 
to report, that they have had the matter com¬ 
mitted to them under consideration, and have 
had full personal conference with the several 
claimants for seats, and recommend to the 
General Assembly for adoption the following 
propositions: 



81 


1. The ecclesiastical judicatories hereinafter 
named are the true and lawful judicatories in 
connection with and under the care and au¬ 
thority of the General Assembly of the Presby¬ 
terian Church in the United States of Amer¬ 
ica, viz: The Synod of Kentucky, which met 
at Henderson, Ky., October, 1866, and ad¬ 
journed to meet, and did meet in Lexington, 
Ky., November, 1866, of which Synod the Rev. 
J T Lapsley is the Moderator and the Rev. S S 
McRoberts is the Stated Clerk; this Synod 
having under its care and authority, and with¬ 
in its ecclesiastical boundaries, the following 
Presbyteries, viz : The Presbytery of Louis¬ 
ville, of which the Rev. J P McMillan is now 
the Moderator and the Rev. R Valentine is the 
Stated Clerk; the Presbytery of Ebenezer, of 
which the Rev. J F Hendy is now the Modera¬ 
tor and the Rev. R F Caldwell is the Stated 
Clerk; the Presbytery of West Lexington, of 
which Rev. Stephen Yerkes, D D., is now the 
Moderator and Rev. J K Lyle is the Stated 
Clerk; the Presbytery of Transylvania, of 
which the Rev. G J Read is now the Modera¬ 
tor and the Rev. S S McRoberts is the Stated 
Clerk; the Presbytery of Muhlenburg, of 
which Rev. A D Metcalf is now the Moderator 
and the Rev. S Y Garrison is the Stated Clerk: 
and the Presbytery of Paducah, of which the 
Rev J P Riddle is now the Moderator 
and the Rev. Jas. Hawthorne is the Stated 
Clerk; and the several Presbyteries having 
in their connection and under their care and 
authority, and within their ecclesiastical 
boundaries, respectively, the ministers,church¬ 
es, licentiates, and candidates, belonging to, 
and 'claiming to belong to, the Presbyterian 
Church in the United States of America. 

The foregoing described judicatories viz: 
The Synod, Presbyteries and Church Sessions, 
within their respective jurisdictions, are to be 
respected and obeyed as the true and only 
lawful judicatories, possessing the names 
above recited, within the State of Kentucky, 
which are in connection with and under the 
care and authority of General Assembly of the 
Presbyterian Church in the United States of 
America, and the commissioners sent to and 
enrolled in this General Assembly from the 
above described Presbyteries are the true and 
lawful commissioners. 

The Synod of Missouri, which met at Boone- 
ville, Mo., October 10, 1866, of which Synod 
the Rev. J P Finley was elected Modorator and 
the Rev. J A Paige was elected Stated Clerk, 
and which adjourned to meet in Kansas City 
on the second Wednesday in October, 1867 ; 
this Synod having under its care and author- 
ty, and within its ecclesiastical boundaries 
the following Presbyteries, viz: The Presby¬ 
tery of St. Louis, of which the Rev. J F Fenton 
is now the Moderator and the Rev. H C Mc¬ 
Cook is the Stated Clerk; the Presbytery of 
Palmyra, of which the Rev. A Steed is now 
the Moderator and the Rev. J P Finley is the 
Stated Clerk; the Presbytery of Potosi, of 
which the Rev. G W Harlan is now the Mod¬ 


erator and Rev. A Munson is the Stated Clerk, 
the Presbytery of Lafayette, of which the Rev 
Charles Sturdevant is now the Moderator and 
Rev. George Fraser is the Stated Clerk; the 
Presbytery of Southwest Missouri, of which 
the Rev. Wm. R Fulton is now the Moderator 
and the Rev. James A Paige is the Stated 
Clerk; and the Presbytery of Upper Missouri, 
of which the Rev. J W Pinkerton is now the 
Moderator and Rev. W C McPheeters is the 
is the Stated Clerk ; and these several Presby¬ 
teries having in their connection and under 
their care and authority, and within their ec¬ 
clesiastical boundaries, respectively, the min¬ 
isters, churches, licentiates and candidates 
belonging to and claiming to belong to the 
Presbyterian Church in the United States of 
America. The above described judicatories, 
viz : the Synod, Presbyteries, and Church Ses¬ 
sions within their respective jurisdictions, are 
to be obeyed as the true and only lawful judi- 
catorias, possessing the names above recited, 
within the State of Missouri, which are in con¬ 
nection with and under the care and authori¬ 
ty of the General Assembly of the Presbyte¬ 
rian Church in the United States of America, 
and the commissioners sent to and enrolled in 
this General Assembly from the above describ¬ 
ed Presbyteries are the true and lawful com¬ 
missioners. 

II. While this General Assembly herein de¬ 
clares, as above set forth, that certain Synods 
or Presbyteries, or bodies claiming to be such, 
within the States of Kentucky and Missouri, 
bearing the same names and claiming to exer¬ 
cise rightful jurisdiction over the same church¬ 
es and people, and within the same territory 
as those above recognized as lawful, are in no 
sense true and lawful Synods and Presbyte¬ 
ries in connection with and under the care 
and authority of the General Assembly of the 
Presbyterian Church in the United States, 
these said unlawful Synods and Presbyteries 
having been dissolved by their own act, under 
an order of the last General Assembly, and 
now being organized in open defiance or dis¬ 
regard of said order; yet, this General Assem¬ 
bly acting in accordance with the decision of 
the last General Assembly, hereby asserts its 
jurisdiction and authority over the ministers 
and churches within, and belonging to, these 
unlawful ecclesiastical organizations; and the 
Presbyteries and Synods herein declared law¬ 
ful, are directed to call at their next stated 
meetings their entire rolls as they existed be¬ 
fore these divisions were made. This General. 
Assembly therefore directs those ministers 
and churches belonging to any of the afore¬ 
said unlawful organizations who may desire 
to remain in connection with the Presbyte¬ 
rian Church, under the care of the General 
Assembly, or who having withdrawn, may de¬ 
sire to return, to report themselves to the 
Presbyteries respectively within whose bounds 
they are located; and the said Presbyteries 
are hereby directed to receive them in the 


82 


manner and upon the conditions hereinafter 
stated, as follows: 

1. Upon the appearance in person, or appli¬ 
cation by letter, of any minister or ministers, 
who have not signed the aforesaid Declaration 
and Testimony, but who have acted with said 
signers, in tho aforesaid unlawful organiza¬ 
tions, the Presbyteries are directed to enroll 
them upon their simple expression of a desire 
to remaia. in, or return to, as the case may 
be, the Presbyterian Church, under the care 
of this General Assembly; and upon the ap¬ 
plication of any church or churches, now em¬ 
braced within any of these unlawful organi¬ 
zations, the Presbyteries are directed to re¬ 
ceive them upon their expression of a similar 
desire. 

2. Upon the application of any minister or 
ministers who signed the aforesaid “ Decla¬ 
ration and Testimony” before, during, or since 
the last meeting of the General Assembly, 
Presbyteries shall require, as a condition of 
their enrollment, that they subscribe upon 
the records of their respective Presbyteries, to 
which they make application, a declaration to 
the following effect, viz : I, A. B., hereby de¬ 
clare my desire to adhere to the Presbyterian 
Church in the United States of America, and 
do now promise to render due obedience, in 
the Lord, to the authority of all its courts, 
embracing the Presbytery, tho Synod, and tli* 
General Assembly, and to this end inasmuch 
as the last General Assembly pronounced, the 
aforesaid Declaration and Testimony to be a 
slander against the church, schismatical in its 
character and aims, and its adoption by any 
of our church courts as an act of rebellion 
against the authority ot the General Assembly, 
I do sincerely disclaim that I had any inten¬ 
tion to rebel against or renounce the authori¬ 
ty of the General Assembly in signing the 
Declaration and Testimony, and I hereby with¬ 
draw all language deemed by the General As¬ 
sembly offensive or disrespectful, in which its 
sentiments are expressed. In case any ruling 
elder who is a signer of the aforesaid Declara¬ 
tion and Testimony, shall express a desire to 
remain in, or to return to the Presbyterian 
Ohurch, he shall be required to subscribe a 
declaration to the same effect, embracing the 
session of the church where he may apply to 
be enrolled, whether or not he be an acting 
elder in that or any other church ; and in case 
any ruling elder who is a signer, as aforesaid, 
should now belong to a church not embraced 
in any of the aforesaid unlawful organizations, 
whether an acting elder or not, he shall sub¬ 
scribe the same declaration upon the re¬ 
cords of the church whenever he is enrolled, 
as a condition of his remaining in good and 
regular standing. 

3. The same requirements shall be made as 
last above specified of any minister or elder 
who is a signer of the aforesaid Declaration 
and Testimony now belonging to any other 
Presbytery or church in any other Synod 
than those of Kentucky and Missouri, i e to 


say any such minister or elder shall subscribe 
the declaration above recited upon the records 
of the Presbytery, or Session, as the case may 
be, as a condition of his remaining in good 
and regular standing. 

4. All the lower courts of the church 
as Sessions, Presbyteries and Synods, 
are hereby enjoined to see that these 
directions of the General Assembly are faith¬ 
fully observed and if in any case or cases, 
arising out of the conduct of the signers of the 
aforesaid Declaration and Testimony, or out 
of the conduct of any of those, not signers, 
who have acted with them in organizing un¬ 
lawful Presbyteries or Synods, any of the low¬ 
er courts deem it their duty to institute pro¬ 
cess, they are hereby enjoined to exercise for¬ 
bearance, and study the things that make for 
peace and harmony. 

6 . In case any person or persons belonging 
to the aforesaid classes now embraced in the 
ecclesiastical organizations herein pronounc¬ 
ed unlawful, shall not make application for 
membership in any of those judicatories under 
the care and recognition of the authority of 
the General Assembly, at or previous to th* 
next spring meetings of the aforesaid lawful 
Presbyteries, the said Presbyteries shall there¬ 
upon drop the names of such ministers, and 
the said churches shall drop the names of such 
elders from their respective rolls, as having 
voluntarily withdrawn fi'om the jurisdiction 
of the Presbyterian Church in the United 
States of America, under the care of the Gen¬ 
eral Assembly, and they shall thenceforth be 
regarded as being no longer ministers or mem¬ 
bers of said Presbyterian Church ; and in 
case any minister or elder belonging to any 
other Presbytery or Church now in our eccle¬ 
siastical connection, who is a signer aforesaid, 
shall not subscribe the aforementioned decla¬ 
ration, at or previous to the next stated spring 
meeting of the Presbytery under whose care 
he is as a minister, or if an elder, under whose 
care his church is placed, his name shall be 
dropped in like manner and with like effect. 

III. This General Assembly deems it proper, 
furthermore, to declare authoritatively the fol¬ 
lowing principles and to set forth the follow¬ 
ing statements to the end that peace and har¬ 
mony may be restored to the church at large 
under its care, and that all persons in its 
connection may be well and faithfully inform¬ 
ed of their duty. 

1. While in the provisions hereinbefore an¬ 
nounced for the purpose of restoring to the 
church, under proper ecclesiastical relations, 
ministerial brethren, elders and churche*, 
whom we regard as having put themselves in 
antagonism to the just authority of the church, 
and especially of the General Assembly, this 
supreme judicatory has endeavored to do this 
in such a manner as, on the one hand, to re¬ 
cognize and maintain the just authority of 
the General Assembly, and on the other, to 
extend the hand of fraternal kindness and 
welcome to the brethren who have erred. 


83 


2. This present action severs no one from 
the church, but leaves the responsibility of 
final separation upon those who fail to give 
heed to the provisions now and herein made 
for their remaining in or return to the church 
of their fathers, whether they be ministers, 
elders, churches or any organizations claiming 
to be Presbyteries and Synods. 

3. The plan now proposed and recommended 
to this General Assembly for adoption recog¬ 
nizes, on the one hand, the authority of the 
last General Assembly in citing the signers of 
the aforesaid Declaration and Testimony to 
appear before this present General Assembly ; 
while, on the other hand, it remits their cases 
to the lower courts for final disposition in a 
way which every minister and member of the 
church must regard as regular, and with the 
simple requisition that the said signers com¬ 
ply with the terms above specified. 

This course does not. even require the said 
signers to renounce the principles of church 
order which they affirm they conscientiously 
entertain, nor is it the wish of the General 
Assembly to interfere with their conscientious 
lonvictions; nor, furthermore, does this plan 
come in conflict with some good and wise 
brethren, who have denied, or seriously doubt¬ 
ed, while fully adhereing to the church, the 
competency of the last General Assembly to 
issue the summons to the signers of the afore¬ 
said Declaration and Test mony, to appear at 
the bar of the present General Assembly to 
answer for what they have done in this mat¬ 
ter. This however, is clear to the whole church 
—that the last and present General Assem¬ 
blies stand in a very different relation to this 
whole matter. When the last General A-»em- 
bly issued its citation to these brethren, such 
was notoriously the condition of the lower 
courts, almost universally, in the Synods of 
Kentucky and Missouri, as subsequent events 
have but too well shown that it would have 
been nothing less than vain trifling with sa¬ 
cred interests, which were greatly imperiled, 
for that General Assembly to have remanded 
the cases of these brethren to those courts, but 
now the Synods of Kentucky and Missouri, 
with the Presbyteries in their connection as 
he rein recognized, adhere to the Presbyterian 
Church through the General Assembly, and 
there is every reason to believe that the direc¬ 
tions herein made will be faithfully executed 
by them. 

4. This General Assembly regards the re¬ 
fusal of many of those cited by the last to ap¬ 
pear before the present Assembly, as a grave 
violation of their duty, while at the same time 
it respects the conscientious, though, as it 
judges, the mistaken conviction of duty 
which has led them to decline obedience. It 
duly regards the declaration of some of these 
brethren, the t in signing the aforesaid Dec¬ 
laration and Testimony, and in their declining 
to obey the aforesaid citation, they intend no 


disrespect to the General Assembly, but have 
taken this course because they deem the last 
and previous General Assemblies, to have ex¬ 
ceeded their constitutional authority. It ought, 
however, to be clear to these brethren, and 
the whole church that when a court of the 
highest grade and jurisdiction has made deci¬ 
sion or issued an order, it is the duty of all 
good and law-abiding men to yield it due res¬ 
pect and obedience until it is repealed by the 
proper authority. This is a principle on which 
all good government rests in civil as well as 
ecclesiastical affairs, and without its due re¬ 
cognition, anarchy would reign in the church 
and state. In the present case according to 
the principles of our system, no lower court or 
body of men is competent to set aside the acts 
of the General Assembly, for it is a court of 
last resort. If men, from conseientious scru¬ 
ples or otherwise, can not abide its deliberate, 
well-considered and solemn decisions, instead 
of persisting during a series of years in open 
defiance of its authority they should, as Chris¬ 
tian men, and in the exercise of their Christian 
liberty, quietly withdraw from the church. 
From the present condition of things, however, 
this General Assembly is not disposed to take 
any further notice of the offense of the signers 
of the aforesaid Declaration and Testimony, or 
their refusal to obey the aforesaid citation of 
the last Assembly than is provided for in the 
plan herein set forth for the restoration of 
peace and harmony and the return of these 
brethren to their proper relations in the 
church. 

5. In regard to the two brethren who have 
obeyed the citation aforesaid—the Rev. J. A. 
Quarles, who signed the aforesaid Declaration 
and Testimony, before the last General Assem¬ 
bly met, and the Rev. W. C. Handy, who has 
signed it since, and who appears before the 
present General Assembly in obedience to a 
‘supposed order of the Synod of Baltimore’—- 
this General Assembly expresses its gratifica¬ 
tion at their manifest spirit of obedience, and 
feels called upon to take no further order in 
their respective cases than to enjoin them to 
repair to their respective Presbyteries and 
comply with the requisitions hereinbefore set 
forth, Mr. Quarles to appear before the near¬ 
est Presbytery which adheres to the General 
Assembly. 

Finally, your committee have been anima¬ 
ted in the measures proposed in this report, 
simply by a desire to maintain the authority 
and restore peace and harmony to the church, 
and they are fully convinced that the same de¬ 
sire pervades the bosom of every member of 
this General Assembly. They only, therefore, 
in addition, recommend the following resolu¬ 
tion, as in their judgment conducive to this 
end, viz: 

Resolved , That upon a motion, to adopt this 
report, if such shall be made, the persons 
claiming seats upon the floor of this General 
Assembly, and those cited to appear here by 


84 


(he last General Assembly shall be heard in 
discussion upon any part of this report. 

All of which is respectfully submitted : 
Signed 

R L Stanton, Chairman ; Willis Lord, W. P. 
Breed, A. T. Rankin, John T. Duffield, James 
I. Brownson, Samuel Galloway, D. S. Collier, 
T. Newton Wilsou, W. S. Gillman, Jr. 


ACT OF 18G4. 

The following deliverance of the General 
Assembly of 1864 was by mistake of the prin¬ 
ters omitted at the proper place. It should 
have appeared at page 31, in connection with 
the other deliverances of the Assembly on the 
same subject. 

Act of 1864 —on slavery ; drawn up by Judge 
Stanley Matthews. 

The Committee on Bills and Oveatures re¬ 
port 

Overture No. 12, from the Presbytery of 
Newton, reciting the former deliverances of 
the General Assembly upon the subject of sla¬ 
very in this country, and the duty of emanci- 
cipation, and asking this General Assembly to 
Lake such action as in their wisdom seems pro¬ 
per to meet the present aspects of human bon¬ 
dage in our country, and recommend th3 adop¬ 
tion of the following : 

In the opinion of the General Assembly, the 
selemn and momentous circumstances of our 
times, the state of our country, and the condi¬ 
tion of our Church, demand a plain declaration 
of its sentiments upon the question of slavery, 
in view of its present aspects in this country. 

From the earliest period of our Church, the 
General Assembly delivered unequivocal testi¬ 
monies upon this subject, which it will be 
profitable now to reaffirm. 

In the year 1787, the Synod of New York 
and Philadelphia, in view of movements then 
on foot looking to the abolition of slavery, and 
highly approving of them, declared that “inas¬ 
much as men introduced from a servile state 
to a participation of all the privileges of civil 
society 1 without a proper education, and with¬ 
out previous habits of industry, may be, in 
many respects, dangerous to the commu¬ 
nity, therefore they earnestly recommend 
it to all the members belonging to 
their communion to give these persons who are 
at present held iu servitude, such good educa¬ 
tion as to prepare them for the better enjoy¬ 
ment of freedom.’’ * * * “And finally 

they recommend it to all their people to use 
the most prudent measures consistent with the 
interest and the state of civil society in the 
countries where they live, to procure eventual¬ 
ly the final abotition of slavery in America.” 

In 1795, the General Assembly “assured all 
the churches under their care that they view 
with the deepest concern any vestiges of slave¬ 
ry which may exist in our country” 


In 1815 the following record was made: 
“The General Assembly have repeatedly de¬ 
clared their cordial approbation of those prin¬ 
ciples of civil liberty which appear to be re¬ 
cognized by the federal and state governments 
ill these United States. They have expressed 
their regret that the slavery of the Africans 
and of their descendants still continues in so 
many places, and even among those within the 
pale of the Church, and have urged the Pres¬ 
byteries under their care to adopt such meas¬ 
ures as will secure, at least to the rising gener¬ 
ation of slaves, within the bounds of the 
Church, a religious education, that they may 
be prepared for the exercise and enjoyment of 
liberty, when God in his providence may open 
a door for their emancipation.” 

The action of the General Assembly upon 
the subject of slavery in the year 1818 is une¬ 
quivocal, and so well known that it need not 
be recited at length. The following extracts, 
however, we regard as applicable io our pre¬ 
sent circumstances, and proper now to be reit¬ 
erated : 

“We consider the voluntary enslaving of one 
portion of the human race by another as a 
gross violation of the most precious and sacred 
rights of human nature, as utterly inconsis¬ 
tent with the law of God, which requires us to 
love eur neighbour as ourselves, and as totally 
irreconcilable with the spirit and principles of 
the gospel of Christ, which enjoins ‘that all 
things whatsoever ye would that men should 
do to you, do ye even so to them.’ Slavery 
creates a paradox in the moral system. It ex¬ 
hibits rational, moral, and accountable beings 
in such circumstances as scarcely to leave 
them the power of moral action. It exhibits 
them as dependent on the will of others, 
whether they shall receive religious instruc¬ 
tion, whether they shall know and worship the 
true God, whether they shall enjoy the ordinan¬ 
ces of the gospel, whether they shall perform 
the duties and cuerish the endearments of 
husbands and wives, parents and children, 
neighbours aud friends; whether they shall 
preserve their chastity and purity, or regard 
the dictates of justice and humanity. Such 
are -ome of the consequences of slavely—con- 
sequnces not imaginary, but which connect 
themselves with its very existance.” * * * 

“From this view of the consequences resul¬ 
ting from the practice, into which Christian 
people have most inconsistently fallen, of en¬ 
slaving a portion of their brethren of man¬ 
kind, . . . it is manifestly the duty of all 

Christians, who enjoy the light of the present 
day, when the inconsistency of slavery, both 
with the dictates of humanity and of religion, 
has been demonstrated, and is generally seen 
and acknowledged, to use their honest, earnest 
and unwearied endeavors to correct the errors 
of former times, and as speedily as possible to 
etface this blot of our holy religion, and to ob¬ 
tain the complete abolition of slavery through¬ 
out the world.” 

They earnestly exhorted those portions of 




85 


the Church where the evil of slavery had been 
entailed upon them, “to continue, and if possi¬ 
ble, to increase their exertions to effect a total 
abolition of slavery, and to suffer no greater 
delay to take place in this most interesting 
concern than a regard to public welfare truly 
and indispensably demandsand declare 
“that our country ought to be governed in this 
matter by no other consideration than an hon¬ 
est and impartial regard to the happiness of 
the injured party, unintlueuced by the expense 
or inconvenience which such a regard may in¬ 
volve warning “all who belong to our de¬ 
nomination of Christians against unduly ex¬ 
tending this plea of necessity ; against making 
it a cover for the love and practice of slavery, 
or a pretence for not using efforts that are law¬ 
ful and practicable to extinguish this evil.” 

Such were the early and unequivocal in¬ 
structions of our Church. It is not necessary 
too minutely to inquire how faithful and obe¬ 
dient to these lessons and warnings those to 
%hom they were addressed have been. It 
ought to be acknowlekged that we have all 
much to confess and lament as to our short¬ 
comings in this respect. Whether a strict and 
careful application of this advice would have 
rescued the country from the evil of its condi¬ 
tion, and the dangers which have since threat¬ 
ened it, is known to the Omniscient alone. 
Whilst we do not believe that the present judg¬ 
ments of our heavenly Father, and Almighty 
and Righteous Governor, have been inflicted 
solely in punishment for our continuance in 
this sin; yet it is our judgment that the recent 
events of our history, and the present condi¬ 
tion of our Church an country, furnish mani¬ 
fest tokens that the time has at length come , in 
the providence of Cod , when it is Ills will that 
every vestige of human slavery among us should he 
effaced, and that every Christian man should ad¬ 
dress himsetf with industry and earnestness to his 
appropriate part in the performance of this great 
duty. 

Whatever excuses for its postponement may 
heretofore have existed, no longer avail. When 
the country was at peace within itself, and the 
Church was unbroken, many consciences were 
perplexed in the presence of this great evil, for 
the want of an adequate remedy. Slavery was 
so formidably intrenched behind the ramparts 
of personal interests and prejudices, that to 
attack it with a view to its speedy overthrow 
appeared to be attacking the very existence of 
the social order itself, and was characterized 
as the inevitable introduction of an anarchy, 
worse in its cansequences than the evil for 
which it seemed to be the only cure. But the 
folly and weakness of men have been the illus¬ 
trations of God’s wisdom and power. Under 
the influence of the most incomprehensible in¬ 
fatuation of wickedness, those who were most 
deeply interested in the perpetuation of slave¬ 
ry have taken away every motive for its further 
toleration. The spirit of American slavery, not 
content with its defences to be found in the 
laws of the States, the provisions of the Federal 


Constitution, the prejudices in favor of existing 
institutions, and the fear of change, has taken 
arms against law, organized a bloody rebellion 
against the national authority, made formida¬ 
ble war upon the Federal Union, and in order 
to found an empire upon the corner-stone, of 
slavery, threatens not our existence as a peo¬ 
ple, but the annihilation of the principles of 
free Christian government; and thus has ren¬ 
dered the continuance of negro slavery incom¬ 
patible with the preservation of our own liber¬ 
ty aud independence. 

In the struggle of the nation for existence 
against this powerful and wicked treason, the 
highest executive authorities have proclaimed 
the abolition of slavery within most of the re¬ 
bel States, and decreed its extinction by mili¬ 
tary force. They have enlisted these formerly 
held as slaves to be soldiers in the national 
armies. They have taken measures to orga¬ 
nize: the labor of the freedmen, and instituted 
measures for their support and government in 
their new condition. It is the President's de¬ 
clared policy not to consent to the reorganiza¬ 
tion of civil government within the seceded 
States upon any other basis than that of eman¬ 
cipation. In the loyal States where slavery 
has not been abolished, measures of emancipa¬ 
tion, in different stages of progress, have been 
set on foot, and are near their consummation ; 
and propositions for an amendment to the Fed¬ 
eral Constitution, prohibiting slavery in all 
the States and Territories, are now pending in 
the national Congress So that, in our present 
situation, the interests of peace and of social 
order are identified with the success of the 
cause of emancipation. The difficulties 
wnich formerly seemed insurmountable, in the 
providence of God, appear now almost remov¬ 
ed. The most formidable remaining obstacle, 
we think, will be found to be the unwilling¬ 
ness of the human heart to see and acccept 
the truth against the prejudices of habit and 
of interest; and to act towards those who have 
been heretofore degraded as slaves, with the 
charity of Christian principle in the necessary 
efforts to improve and elevate them. 

In view, therefore, of its former testimonies 
upon the subject, the General Assembly does 
hereby devoutly express its gratitude to Al¬ 
mighty God for having overruled the wicked¬ 
ness and calamities of the rebellion, so as to 
work out the deliverance of our country from 
the evil and guilt of slavery ; its earnest desire 
for the extirpation of slaver}', as the root of 
bitterness from which has sprung rebellion, 
war, and bloodshed, and the long list of hor¬ 
rors that follow in their train: its earnest 
trust, that the thorough removal of this prolific 
source of evil and harm will be speedily fol¬ 
lowed by the blessings of our Heavenly Fath¬ 
er, the return of peace, union and fraternity, 
and abounding prosperity to the whole land ; 
and recommend to all in our communion to 
labor honestly, earnestly, and unweariedly in 
their respective spheres for this glorious con¬ 
summation, to which human justice, Christian 


86 


'' love, national peace and prosperity, every 
earthly and every religious interest, combine 
to pledge them. 

No New doctrine on Slaver//. 

We append the following, extracts from the 
minutes of the Assembly of 1806, expressly 
avowing that the Assembly lias no doctrine on 
the subject of slavery, differing from that 
which is taught in all its past deliverances. 
We quote on page 86, of the minutes from the 
‘ Pastoral Letter,” which was written by Dr. 
Stanton, and adopted by a vote of 142 yeas, 15 
na_y s, 9 uonliquet, excused 2. 

“It was under these circumstances that the 
Assembly of 1865 tock its action on slavery. 
(The ‘Pittsburg orders’). That action has been 
greatly misrepresented. It has frequently as¬ 
serted in high places that it conflicts with pre¬ 
vious testimonies of the General Assembly, 
which declare that slave-holding is not a bar 
to Christian communion. It is a sufficient re¬ 
ply to this, to say, that the action of the last 
Assembly conflicts with no former testimony; 
nor does it make the remotest allusion to slave¬ 
holding being, or not being, a bar to Christian 
communion. The main points of its action on 
slavery, indeed the only points refering to 
those who may apply for reception into our 
church from the churches in the Southare, that 
such applicants shall renounce the errors, 
which assert ‘that the system of negro slavery 
in the South is a divine institution,’ that it is 
‘an ordinance of God’ in the sense above stated, 
and that ‘it is the peculiar mission of the 
Southern churches to conserve the institution 
of el a very’ as it was maintained in the South.” 

(Page 89) “Dr. Krebs offered the following 
ns an addition to the Pastoral Letter, which 
was adopted: (Extract) 

“Nor does the Assembly deem it needless to 
observe, that while manifestly the views put 


forth by these deliverances, and the views 
which it was proposed to elicit from applicants 
for admission to our churches and Pyesbyte- 
ries, have regard only to those more recent 
opinions concerning the sjmtem of Southern 
slavery, out of which secession and the war 
grew for its perpetuation and extension, the 
Assembly considers that there is no con¬ 
tradiction between these latest expres¬ 
sions of the Assembly, needed by a new 
state of case, and the whole current of consis¬ 
tent deliverances on the subject of slavery 
which the church has from the beginning aud 
all along attend—especially from 1818 to 
1846.” 


CONCLUSION. 

We now bring our record to a close. We 
began with the charges made by the Decla ¬ 
ration party, that, in legislating on civil affairs 
and on slavery, the Church has “departed 
from the old landmarks;” that its deliveran¬ 
ces of the past six years are unwarranted by 
Scripture, and contrary to her past course 
and teachings on these subjects. \\ r e under¬ 
took to prove the charges false, by producing 
the records of the Church in past thnes, both 
on civil affairs and on slavery. We claim 
that these records show, that in the acts of the 
Assembly for the past seven years, there is 
not one word condemning slavery, or enforc¬ 
ing the duty of upholding the civil govern¬ 
ment—not one word in any or all these acts— 
that is not fully warranted by the former 
deliverances of the Church on these to¬ 
pics. And here we cheerfully entrust our 
cause to the judgement of a candid Christian 
public. 



CONTENTS 


The charges prefered - 

Pastoral letter upon occasion of the Old French War, 

Pastoral letter on the Repeal of the Stamp Act, 

Pastoral letter upon occasion of the Revolutionary War, 

Days of fasting &c, appointed by the Synod and Assembly, 

Assemblies Address to Washington, - 

Paper on the Uniom of Church and State, 

Deliverances of 1801,-62’ - 

Deliverance of 1863, - - 

Deliverance of 1865, - - 

Deliverances of the Southern Church, relating to the War, 

Address of Dr. J. T. Smith, - 

Address of Dr. E. P. Humphrey—The Great Issues Stated, 

Arguments, based chiefly on the above deliverances, 

Various Acts on Slavery, ... 

Act of 1818, - - - 

Act of 1845, - 

Act of 1846, ----- 

Various acts of the Presbytery of Transylvania, 

Action of Synod of Kentucky on Slavery, - 
Various acts of the Presbytery of West Lexington, - 
Address of the Synod of Kentucky on Slavery, 

Action of the Synod of Kentucky in 1861, on the Minutes of the Assembly, 

Action of of Synod in 1863, - 

Action of Synod in 1864 and ’65, - 

Division of Synod at Henderson, - 

Synod’s paper on the Minutes of the Assembly, 

Synod’s Narative of the state of Religion, - 

Miscellaneous articles, - 

Act of 1864 on Slavery, 

Act of 1866 on same, 

Act of 1867 on the Declaration party, 

Conclusion, 


Page, 

1 

O 

- O 

4 

5 
8 
1 ) 

10 

- 11 
13 

- 14 
15 

- 16 

20 

22 

25 

- 27 
29 

- 30 


31 

- 34 
35 

- 41 
53 

- 54 
55 


57 

58 

- 61 
65 


















■ 






























. 

' 































* 

. 





























LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 











































